News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for offic... by LeafItAlone on Monday July 01, 2024 @11:15PM (#40853240)
> What I feel like the dissent misses completely, which is quite ironic given Justice Sotomayor’s history in private practice

Why do you presume that the dissent did not consider this? What are your qualifications to think you’ve considered this more completely than the SCOTUS (whether or not you agree)?

Re:Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for offic... by maxlybbert on Tuesday July 02, 2024 @03:02AM (#40854205)
Well, because the dissent doesn’t mention it.