Charlie Stross2d ago

Mad idea: given that the US Supreme Court ruled that the President essentially has immunity from criminal prosecutions for acts during his term in office, could J. D. Vance plausibly shoot Donald Trump dead, thereby becoming President, and claim immunity?

(I know this is very silly and Won't Happen for several reasons, but is there a legal fig-leaf he could hide behind here?)

Show threadAngus McIntyre2d ago

@cstross As others have pointed out, killing the incumbent while VP would not be an ‘official act as president’, ergo immunity would not apply.

Vance could bludgeon Trump unconscious, assume office based on Trump's incapacity, and THEN kill him, reducing his potential culpability to assault rather than murder.

If the US were Nepal, it might be more clearcut. As the events of 1 June 2001 established, regicide is no barrier to assuming the kingship (although a self-administered 9mm bullet is).

Show threadGalbinus Caeli2d ago
@angusm @cstross
Nothing so dramatic is needed.
Vance and ten members of the cabinet could simply declare Trump incompetent and remove him from office.
Or a committee formed by Congress could do the same.
(25th Amend. Sec. 4 US Const.)
Incompetence is a MUCH lower bar than criminal activity.
No need for sixty guys in togas. Eleven in ill fitting shoes would suffice.
Show threadQ.H. Stone2d ago
@GalbinusCaeli @angusm @cstross Except that won’t stick unless 2/3rds of Congress and Senate agree. Plus Trump chose his cabinet for their loyalty, not their competence.
Show threadGalbinus Caeli2d ago
@qhstone @angusm @cstross That is for impeachment. For 25th amendment it is the courts. Which isn't much better.
Show threadQ.H. Stone
@GalbinusCaeli @angusm @cstross The text of the 25th is quite clear: the House and Senate decide the issue if the president insists he’s still able to do the job. No court involvement.
Mar 16 at 12:11amWeb
Show threadGalbinus Caeli2d ago
@qhstone @angusm @cstross you are correct, my apologies