Comment

Comment on Supreme Court issues decision on Trump immunity case | CNN Politics

wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

The president needs some immunity to do their job.

I think you’ll see more precision in future cases. This was more of a blanket ruling since they were trying to ignore immunity given to presidents.

As they sort through the charges, I suspect they’ll come back to scotus.

I am not against some immunity but I am against complete immunity.

source

Sort:hotnew top

Shadehawk25@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Nearly 250 years as a court try and it’s never been an issue until a criminal became president.

source
- jimbolauski@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  There have been multiple Supreme Court cases regarding the scope presidential immunity.
  
  Mississippi v. Johnson (1867) Spalding v. Vilas (1896) Barr v. Matteo (1959) Chippewa Tribe v. Carlucci (1973) National Treasury Employees Union v. Nixon (1974) Nixon v. Fitzgerald (1982) Clinton v. Jones (1994)
  
  source
  - wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    But the orange man! It’s funny to watch the comments from people who didn’t read or understand the ruling.
    
    Really this is just confirming what has been said previously. It isn’t really ground breaking.
    
    source
jimbolauski@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Exactly it was the lower courts opnion that presidential immunity never applied. SCOTUS simply said there are instances when it does. The lower courts will make determinations on specific instances and if challenged those specific instances can reviewed by SCOTUS.

source
- wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  A good example is when Obama was killing American citizens in other countries. Should he be charged for that? While I don’t agree with his decision, it is his right as president. Impeachment is how you handle these issues
  
  source
realcaseyrollins@noauthority.social ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
@wintermute_oregon While you're right, my only problem with this is that there's no harm in just providing that precision now.
While I'm not going through conniptions over this like the #BlueAnon wokeboi crew here, there is a part of me that suspects that this ruling could risk giving the #POTUS too much power in the future. With a ruling so broad, caution, rather than jubilance or terror, seems to be the only reasonable stance to take until we know just what this ruling will do.
source