US supreme court to decide on Trump’s claim of presidential immunity

The US supreme court will on Thursday hear oral arguments in Donald Trump v United States, the former president’s appeal in his federal election subversion case, in which he claims presidents are immune from prosecution for acts committed in office.
In briefs to the court, lawyers for Trump said “a denial of criminal immunity would incapacitate every future president”.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/apr/25/supreme-court-trump-immunity-claim

____________________________________

Today we're going to witness the full-scale demolition of Trump's lawyers before this country's highest judges.

It is unthinkable that SCOTUS would agree with Trump.

And what's most frightening is that the MAGA would see it as a victory if Trump got immunity from criminal charges, making him the equivalent of a King or dictator.

This is the country they want....

 

If I was a cynic given the hyper partisan times and the partisan split of SCOTUS this could be what they do.

Listen to the orals, ask a lot of non leading questions. Retire to deliberate BUT don't rule this cycle. Win, win for the MAGA majority of the court. No ruling this cycle will ensure the Smith cases can't proceed and SCOTUS not ruling that Trump is a King also works to stop the current King, Dark Brandon from having the immunity or qualified immunity they would like to bestow on Agent Oranges.

Is that cynical or what?

 

King Trump has a decent ring to it. "The Don" probably the best.

 

Actually, Trump's lame attempt at equating himself with John Gotti has always been "The Donald"...

 

Not really.
The chickensxit SCOTUS , with their MAGA righties, absolutely know that their best play is not to rule this cycle. On the other hand, if they don't rule and Biden wins the election, they are sealing the Orange Stain's fate. Subsequently, if the rule for him, Biden can do whatever he wants to Orange. If they rule against him, there will be years of prosecutions against him, uninterrupted.

 

Easiest thing to do is delay delay delay

 

Prima Donald​

On Trump’s immunity claim, an overwhelming number of Americans (66%) thought in that poll that the former president should not be immune to criminal prosecution for actions he took while president, according to an ABC News/Ipsos February poll. That included 45% of Republicans and 83% of Democrats. Independents fell in between at 66%.​

 

It is unthinkable that SCOTUS would not agree with Trump. Subjecting a former president for actions he took while president is a most abominable thing. Say a president calls out the military in defense of the US and some soldiers, airmen, or sailors get killed in the action. Do you really think that president should be brought up for manslaughter after he has left the presidency?? That is one of the most chilling actions inhibiting a president I can think of.

 

Has to be something in the middle though.... can't have a president doing whatever the **** he wants either.

 

The actions would have to be overtly illegal and not part of their presidential duties….like trying to steal an election they lost.

 

Scrolling through the "notes" of todays hearing, it doesn't sound like the Court is leaning toward agreement with Trump.
Reading between the lines, they seem to be headed toward a ruling that the president is not immune to anything they do as president, which I would agree with.
How could they rule in favor of immunity when the president takes an oath of office basically agreeing to follow all laws?
I'll agree that the only real purpose or gain from this action is the delay of taking responsibility for Trump's actions.
I predict that if Trump doesn't win the election, he is royally screwed. It will be a strong motivator for Dem and left leaning voters: vote for Biden to hold Trump accountable. I honestly don't think it's in the cards for Trump to win. His base has weakened some, and the independents are waning on his support. He still has his hard core base, but it won't be enough.

 

Direct quote from the oral arguments today:

 

Is there a single MAGA on this forum - just one - who has ever read the Constitution?... who ironically claims to defend.

Educating MAGA gets tiresome in the long run.

In addition to not knowing anything about the Constitution, you don't even understand the difference between an act within the scope of presidential duties and a criminal act.

Trump has committed so many crimes that I have dozens of examples.

Here's one:

How is setting up a scheme to illegally replace electors in a state part of a POTUS's job?

Explain that to me.

 

I heard that.

And MAGA will agree with Trump's lawyer argument.

A shame.

But basically, the goal isn't to win this case, because it's impossible.

The objective is to gain time and delay the trials.

 

Yeah, but what if he wins? I’ve been watching the transcripts comming out and his lawyers are literally claiming full, non challengeable immunity. Even when asked if he could assassinate his political rival, they did not say that would be a line.

I really hope this SC holds up. But there are some serious radicals on this court that are being found in these questions.

 

yeah but they will vote for the Democrat side

 

The rule of law is a principle that no one, not even the president, is above the law.

https://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/overview-rule-law

...https://constitutionus.com/democracy/what-is-the-rule-of-law/

https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/rule-law/

....https://reyabogado.com/us/does-the-us-follow-the-rule-of-law/​

​

 

Partisan proclivities aside, the Supreme Court ruling that any American is above the law is the death knell for democracy, our certified democratic elections, justice system, and agents of law and order already under attack by unscrupulous characters.

​

Such a radical ruling would pose the question to goobers Comer and Jordan, "Why are you pretending to refer charges you concoct against the President to the Department pf Justice if presidents are above the law?"

 

I think your right, BUT, some of the answers comming from some of these judges are absolutely scary as hell.

 

The Constitution says nothing about prosecuting an ex president except that it is allowed after impeachment..

The immunity case makes no distinction between presidential actions and criminal actions.

 

Yeah, you go with that…..

Good lord. You righties need to be careful here. You caught eh abortion car, and now it’s starting to hurt your polling. I said when they started this fight to be careful that you don't ignore the scorn of the female vote……and guess what you did…

 

The immunity case makes no distinction between presidential actions and criminal actions.

 

Got anything to purpose that would work?

 

I am not a MAGA but I will vote for Trump. Want to play who knows more about the constitution and constitutional law?

 

Agreed.

I dont think it’s hyperbole to say that if they vote that a POTUS has “full, undeniable immunity”, that democracy is over.