Y'all gotta understand by now that both sides will literally use everything they possibly can as a W or fear mongering tactic to win.
Yeah I know, my astonishment isn’t based on something changing, just new info to meI mean that could've been true even without this ruling lol
That's my point is it really didn't change much.
He would still have to convince the court that his actions were reasonable. He doesn't have unilateral power to get away with it bc he said so and no one does anything about it.
Presidents can still be impeached and held accountable with this ruling.
And who picked the judges from these lower courts?? If it's Trump appointed judges then...
The "fear mongering" is not unjustified
What's your specific interpretation of it?I disagree it's just fear mongering and doesn't change anything
You can read the exact ruling
Page 22
One of the first things I thought of was the Iraq War. I don't remember the specifics, but Bush went over a lot of heads to deploy troops. I'm sure each wartime president got something on his jacket that would land him in the chair.I'm not an expert here but doesn't the rule kinda keep in place what's already been?
Like, trump got convicted of something, and im all for corrupt politicians being held accountable, but why then do presidents get away with war crimes over and over again?
The question is more "what are official acts vs unofficial"
For me it's too much of a grey area with the lower courts able to decide what's an official or unofficial act. Supreme court left it wide openWhat's your specific interpretation of it?
Taking into account these competing considerations, we conclude that the separation of powers principles explicated in our precedent necessitate at least a presumptive immunity from criminal prosecution for a President’s acts within the outer perimeter of his official responsibility.
Page 96The President of the United States is the most powerful person in the country, and possibly the world. When he uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military 30 TRUMP v. UNITED STATES SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune. Let the President violate the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends. Because if he knew that he may one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be. That is the majority’s message today. Even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do, the damage has been done. The relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law. * * * The majority’s single-minded fixation on the President’s need for boldness and dispatch ignores the countervailing need for accountability and restraint. The Framers were not so single-minded. In the Federalist Papers, after “endeavor[ing] to show” that the Executive designed by the Constitution “combines . . . all the requisites to energy,” Alexander Hamilton asked a separate, equally important question: “Does it also combine the requisites to safety, in a republican sense, a due dependence on the people, a due responsibility?” The Federalist No. 77, p. 507 (J. Harvard Library ed. 2009). The answer then was yes, based in part upon the President’s vulnerability to “prosecution in the common course of law.” Ibid. The answer after today is no. Never in the history of our Republic has a President had reason to believe that he would be immune from criminal prosecution if he used the trappings of his office to violate the criminal law. Moving forward, however, all former Presidents will be cloaked in such immunity. If the occupant of that office misuses official power for personal gain, the criminal law that the rest of us must abide will not provide a backstop.
For me it's too much of a grey area with the lower courts able to decide what's an official or unofficial act. Supreme court left it wide open
![]()
Sotomayor's dissent: A president should not be a 'king above the law'
The Supreme Court is allowing a president to become a “king above the law,” in the use of official power, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said in a biting dissent that called the majority opinion on immunity for former President Donald Trump “utterly indefensible.”apnews.com
Page 96
He brought the case to them to avoid being tried for Jan 6.Y'all are really going with the logic that a majority conservative supreme court just gave all this unilateral power to the current president of the U.S. who isn't trump, and isn't a Republican.
Just think about it a lil bit.
Right. It buys him time but it doesn't absolve him of anything whatsoever nor makes a ruling on his cases.He brought the case to them to avoid being tried for Jan 6.
No one said the maga cult was smartY'all are really going with the logic that a majority conservative supreme court just gave all this unilateral power to the current president of the U.S. who isn't trump, and isn't a Republican.
Just think about it a lil bit.
If that last tweet u posted is what u think is actually happening then yes, u are being fear mongeredNo one said the maga cult was smart
Also this would play into project 2025 if trump were to win
But this is all just fear mongering lol
One of the first things I thought of was the Iraq War. I don't remember the specifics, but Bush went over a lot of heads to deploy troops. I'm sure each wartime president got something on his jacket that would land him in the chair.
100% believe trump would say whatever he's doing is an official act. Have you seen his tweets? Did you not see what he was saying about the classified documents just laying around? LolIf that last tweet u posted is what u think is actually happening then yes, u are being fear mongered
Now I'm not saying he isn't dumb/corrupt enough to attempt that, what I am saying is the SC ruling today doesn't automatically grant him immunity the way people are scared into thinking
Lol bruh you're still missing it.100% believe trump would say whatever he's doing is an official act. Have you seen his tweets? Did you not see what he was saying about the classified documents just laying around? Lol
His ego believes he's above everything. That's not fear mongering. That's just stating the fact lol