The Supreme Court has been asked to weigh in on a question that will decide if the former president faces charges for efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

WASHINGTON (CN) — The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to review a fast-tracked petition asking if Donald Trump can use his status as a former president to claim immunity from criminal charges related to his effort to overturn the 2020 election.

The order came only hours after Special Counsel Jack Smith asked the justices to expedite consideration of Trump’s presidential immunity claim in his D.C. prosecution for election interference leading up to the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection. The decision is not an agreement to hear Smith’s case, but rather an agreement to review his petition faster than normal.

92 points

Immunity while head of state? Sounds like a monarchy to me.

permalink
report
reply
59 points

And if SCOTUS says the President is an absolute monarch? What would you want Biden to do next? The GQP just never thinks this through.

permalink
report
parent
reply
58 points

And if SCOTUS says the President is an absolute monarch? What would you want Biden to do next?

Use his powers as monarch to remove the justices that gave him such power, then abdicate back down to president.

permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points

It would be in the most Biden way possible too. Dissolve the current court, instate mildly progressive liberals, and order a reruling to remove his power

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Cincinnatus reborn

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

Arrest the bunch of them. “The Republican party is hereby disbanded, arrests begin in 5 minutes.”

(throwback for the kids in the room):

https://youtu.be/CFCABnWlN8E

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Can’t believe that this became an international faux pas. Reagan was absolutely a spawn of Satan, but come on. Unless “We begin bombing in 5 minutes” was broadcasted live (the report says it was an audio test) there’s no way it should be read as anything other than gallows humor.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

The GQP absolutely thought this through…Biden either won’t have the balls to do anything about this, or he croaks trying to actually accomplish something.

This is the checkmate they’ve been working at since Bush Jr.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

Not at all… Trump wasn’t born into his position. This is fascism, friend.

Edit: I mean, he was born into money, though…

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Pretty sure most of them don’t even have that anymore

permalink
report
parent
reply
66 points

The legit argument for immunity is that a president is completely immune for official actions, anything else done while he is president but not official presidential action can’t be charged while president but can be charged after his term.

Assuming they aren’t charging anything that could be construed as an official presidential action, this should be 9-0 of course you can be charged.

permalink
report
reply
25 points
*

Anything illegal should be charge-worthy, official or not, just like any other office. Actively holding the title of president entities immunity only as a delay, because that role also serves as commander-in-chief for the US. Having that seat empty during a prosecution could be hugely disruptive to the executive branch and strategically unwise for geopolitics.

But once the new president takes over, there’s no longer any reason to delay the judicial process with temporary immunity.

At least, that’s how I learned it in 6th grade, midwest public school.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Which is precisely why trump wants to be a dictator. If he stays President, he’s perpetually immune.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I’m actually pro prosecution / impeachment of presidents for that reason, we have a backup available so it doesn’t actually hurt us. But I have to disagree on official actions. Sending someone to war can’t be reckless endangerment, having someone drone striked can’t be murder, we can’t have the president sued for damages every time they sign a law that harms a business or industry.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Signing laws isn’t illegal in the first place.

And I want to say I might be completely okay with holding those in power responsible for endangerment / drone strikes / murder / war.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

His efforts to overturn the election came about while he was still President. Trump was the President of the United States on January 6th, 2021. Biden was not the President until January 20th, 2021.

Framing it that way, this is getting worse all the time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

He was president but it wasn’t official action so he could be charged after he was done being president aka now.

permalink
report
parent
reply
42 points

My prediction: 7-2 with Alito and Thomas holding out for divine right of kings.

permalink
report
reply
14 points

something something rich historical tradition something something acts of supremacy

permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points

So, basically, we are totally fucked if they say he’s immune and can commit treason

permalink
report
reply
66 points

If presidents are immune then Biden is instantly free to have the FBI toss Trump in super max.

permalink
report
parent
reply
36 points

Biden could just go murder him in the street.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

Well he wouldn’t lose my vote!

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

He won’t, though. The democrats are all pretty inept.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Don’t tease me like this

permalink
report
parent
reply
34 points

If they give him immunity, they are basically saying any president can rig an election with no consequences. It would completely undermine our system of government.

permalink
report
reply
17 points

Clarence Thomas: heavy breathing

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 476K

    Comments