SCOTUS Ruiling

[mspart]

32 minutes ago, braves121 said:

This decision opens a can of worms. Trumps lawyers literally argued that political assassinations could be views as official acts so why are you acting that it is an impossibility? Theoretically this does in fact make the president a monarch because he has immunity with “ official acts” Biden could go ahead and have the fbi lock up trump for any reason and say it’s an official act. Biden could say is suspending all elections as an official act. It’s not about R v D it’s about recognizing this is no good lol

An official act outside the constitution is not an official act.  I think your example is going too far.  A President cannot lock up a person without due process.   A President cannot suspend elections.   Those are extra constitutional and would not be covered by the decision.  If this is incorrect, then this is a bad decision.   I believe this applies to making law by fiat without input from Congress. 

mspart

[Scouts Honor]

Leftists: The GOP are fascists

also leftists: NOW WE CAN ASSASSINATE THOSE MF'ers

[VakAttack]

Just now, Lipdrag said:

Does not the term "official acts" become the qualifier of the absolute?

Nay, good sir.  Under the old legal system, when we were a Constitutional Republic, despite it's reputation, qualified immunity was not a COMPLETE shield against any prosecution or law suit.  The protections were broad but not complete.   Ahh the dark days before the ascension.

[VakAttack]

1 minute ago, Scouts Honor said:

Leftists: The GOP are fascists

also leftists: NOW WE CAN ASSASSINATE THOSE MF'ers

Whatever wise decision is reached by the Leader, who are we to question it or try to hold them accountable?

[braves121]

2 minutes ago, Scouts Honor said:

Leftists: The GOP are fascists

also leftists: NOW WE CAN ASSASSINATE THOSE MF'ers

I think it’s more so that trumps lawyers argued that assassinating a political rival is an official act and now the sc rules that as an official act is immune to law.just using the same arguments trumps lawyers used for this

[braves121]

17 minutes ago, mspart said:

An official act outside the constitution is not an official act.  I think your example is going too far.  A President cannot lock up a person without due process.   A President cannot suspend elections.   Those are extra constitutional and would not be covered by the decision.  If this is incorrect, then this is a bad decision.   I believe this applies to making law by fiat without input from Congress. 

mspart

There is no wording about congress at all regarding an official act. 
 

Official act" for the purposes of Section 201(b) and (c) is defined to mean:

"Any decision or action on any question, matter, cause, suit, proceeding or controversy, which may at any time be pending, or which may by law be brought before any public official, in such official's official capacity, or in such official's place of trust or profit.” https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-2044-particular-elements 
 

in the ruling they just use the words “ core constitutional power” but according to this ruling the president has immunity so he could theoretically sign an executive order giving him extra powers and legally there’s nothing could be done because that had nothing to do with congress it was done by executive 
 In theory Biden could sign an EO suspending habeas corpus and that’s within his new immunity rights 

Edited July 1 by braves121

[Paul158]

2 hours ago, braves121 said:

Conversely trumps lawyers argued that ordering an assignation of a political opponent would be an official act, Biden has an opportunity to try something 

Please tell us what an assignation is.

[braves121]

2 minutes ago, Paul158 said:

Please tell us what an assignation is.

Same thing as a ruiling

[uncle bernard]

1 hour ago, Scouts Honor said:

Leftists: The GOP are fascists

also leftists: NOW WE CAN ASSASSINATE THOSE MF'ers

It's called hyperbole. It's a rhetorical tool to demonstrate how stupid something is. In this case, the idea that the president can break the law because he's president.

[uncle bernard]

Can any of the conservatives on here defending this explain why they think a US citizen should be able to break the law without consequence? I thought you were the law and order guys?

[Paul158]

14 minutes ago, braves121 said:

Same thing as a ruiling

Assignation ,Definition : An appointment to meet someone in secret, typically one made by lovers. So as a president that would fall under official business would it not?

[Wrestleknownothing]

Just now, Paul158 said:

Assignation ,Definition : An appointment to meet someone in secret, typically one made by lovers. So as a president that would fall under official business would it not?

I thought this was @ionel's job. Don't let the union foreman find out.

[braves121]

20 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

Can any of the conservatives on here defending this explain why they think a US citizen should be able to break the law without consequence? I thought you were the law and order guys?

We are the party of law and order!!! Oh wait our guys a convicted felon? Nvm

Back the blue! Except for the fbi defund them!

my body my choice!! Except for women wanting to get abortions 

Lock her up!!! We shouldn’t use the legal system to go after political opponents

we are the party of small government! Gives the president the most power anyone has ever had in this country 

they say one thing and mean other 

Edited July 1 by braves121

[Paul158]

4 hours ago, Bigbrog said:

Big implications from the ruling today by the SCOTUS around presidential immunity.  Wonder how many charges will be dropped on Trump now?

I think this ruling will cut down on bringing frivolous lawsuits. Which would be a good thing. The President has to have the freedom to make very difficult decisions ( national security interests,etc.) without the fear of the opposing party or special interest groups bringing lawsuits against him.

Edited July 1 by Paul158
missed a word

[ionel]

2 hours ago, braves121 said:

What would you call it when a leader gets a dangerous amount of power and is unable to be held accountable?

By all accounts he had the same power before as after.

[Paul158]

4 hours ago, Bigbrog said:

Big implications from the ruling today by the SCOTUS around presidential immunity.  Wonder how many charges will be dropped on Trump now?

Jack Smith will have a difficult road now to prosecute Trump.

[ionel]

2 hours ago, braves121 said:

When the party of small government applauds at giving the government even more power

The Supreme Court is not big government, it is one of our 3 branches- checks & balance.

[braves121]

2 minutes ago, ionel said:

The Supreme Court is not big government, it is one of our 3 branches- checks & balance.

The Supreme Court saying the president now has “absolute immunity” instead of “qualified immunity” is giving him more power and believe it or not that goes against the concept of small government :0

Edited July 1 by braves121

[braves121]

4 minutes ago, Paul158 said:

Jack Smith will have a difficult road now to prosecute Trump.

It’s going to be hard to argue that trump holding classified documents at mar a lago is an official act that doesn’t help him personally lmao 

[ionel]

22 minutes ago, Paul158 said:

Assignation ,Definition : An appointment to meet someone in secret, typically one made by lovers. So as a president that would fall under official business would it not?

 

21 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

I thought this was @ionel's job. Don't let the union foreman find out.

I've been traveling.  When it comes to secet meetings with lovers Paul's got my back. Dont ask why I was traveling. 

[ionel]

4 minutes ago, braves121 said:

The Supreme Court saying the president now has “absolute immunity” instead of “qualified immunity” is giving him more power and believe it or not that goes against the concept of small government :0

Not if he already had the immunity and it didn't increase size of govt.  We had one President before and one President after.  No one has yet created a new Department of Immunity.

[Paul158]

3 minutes ago, braves121 said:

It’s going to be hard to argue that trump holding classified documents at mar a lago is an official act that doesn’t help him personally lmao 

I believe it will have more to do with the process that Jack Smith is trying to use. Just a few violations.

[braves121]

3 minutes ago, ionel said:

Not if he already had the immunity and it didn't increase size of govt.  We had one President before and one President after.  No one has yet created a new Department of Immunity.

The president did not have “absolute immunity” before this ruling. That is giving a government official literally more power than had before it’s comical you can’t see that is big government lol

[Scouts Honor]

1 hour ago, VakAttack said:

Whatever wise decision is reached by the Leader, who are we to question it or try to hold them accountable?

noted

[Scouts Honor]

50 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

It's called hyperbole. It's a rhetorical tool to demonstrate how stupid something is. In this case, the idea that the president can break the law because he's president.

i used it to show how stupid leftists are