Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for official acts

Re:Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for offic... by georgeplusplus on Tuesday July 02, 2024 @07:16AM (#40855492)

If you have to resort to such an extreme scenario then the ruling probably is a good one.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for offic... by Hammershaft on Tuesday July 02, 2024 @09:11AM (#40856302)

That scenario is from the dissenting opinion of justice sotomayer in the pdf brief. Trump's lawyers argued that immunity extends to assassinating political opponents.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for offic... by georgeplusplus on Monday July 08, 2024 @07:22AM (#40904400)

Source?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for offic... by RavingGoat on Tuesday July 02, 2024 @10:02AM (#40856806)

It makes the president a king. If Trump gets reelected do you think he will ever leave office? If you think that's far fetched then you haven't read Project 2025 where he can replace weather service employees that don't make forecasts he likes.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for offic... by jasomill on Tuesday July 02, 2024 @07:38PM (#40861503)

Short of a civil war, yes, because the text of the 22nd Amendment is unambiguous and requires considerably more process than a supermajority in the House and Senate to overturn.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for offic... by mcphage on Tuesday July 02, 2024 @12:30PM (#40858202)

Did you seriously just argue that "if this decision has the potential for extreme negative consequences, then it must be a good decision"?

[ Parent | on HN ]