m-p{3}Federal appeals court rules Trump doesn't have broad immunity from prosecution
Heresy_generator
Aniki đ±đżInteresting they used Nixon as precedent.
Riccosuave^ Everyone upvote this for visibility please. People need to read this.
agent_flounderExcept:
For the purpose of this criminal case, former President Trump has become citizen Trump, with all of the defenses of any other criminal defendant. But any executive immunity that may have protected him while he served as President no longer protects him against this prosecution.
Also:
In relevant part, the district court rejected Trumpâs claim of executive immunity from criminal prosecution, holding that â[f]ormer Presidents enjoy no special conditions on their federal criminal liability.â United States v. Trump, â F. Supp. 3d â, 2023 WL 8359833, at *3 (D.D.C. Dec. 1, 2023). It concluded that â[t]he Constitutionâs text, structure, and history do not supportâ the existence of such an immunity, id., and that it âwould betray the public interestâ to grant a former President âa categorical exemption from criminal liabilityâ for allegedly âattempting to usurp the reins of government.â Id. at *12.
FinallyâŠ
as the Supreme Court has unequivocally explained:
No man in this country is so high that he is above the law. No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. All the officers of the government, from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law and are bound to obey it. It is the only supreme power in our system of government, and every man who by accepting office participates in its functions is only the more strongly bound to submit to that supremacy, and to observe the limitations which it imposes upon the exercise of the authority which it gives.
Which is great until the law gets changed by a bunch of sycophants in congress.
Thatâs all well and good but heâs being prosecuted for something that he did while he was still president
And, as the ruling states, the president isnât immune to all prosecution.
According to what OP quoted a former president can be prosecuted. Iâd like to see them rule that the law applies to actions committed by a president
Read the ruling. It discussed this.
Heâs being prosecuted for doing something illegal (allegedly) that wasnât part of his official duties as President.
The ruling quoted by the oedon I replied to applies to things done by a former presidentâŠIâd like to see the courts role that the law applies to a current president, or someone who was president at a time. It seems like common sense but the law doesnât operate on common sense
So, youâre saying you think it should be legal for Biden to shoot you in the face?
No, Iâm saying I want the ruling to be relevant to Trumpâs situation so he can be prosecuted. Where the fuck are you getting that from?
LillyPipGreatest works of poetry of all time:
-
William Carlos Williams, âThe Red Wheelbarrowâ
-
T. S. Eliot, âThe Waste Landâ
-
Robert Frost, âThe Road Not Takenâ
-
Gwendolyn Brooks, âWe Real Coolâ
-
US Court of Appeals v Donald J Trump
Thanks!
Who might analyze this at length, any YouTubers or podcasters? Iâm thinking Leonard French or The WeedsâŠ
medgremlinLegal Eagle has been doing some good commentary videos on the slew of Trump legal stuff.
Ah nice, thanks.