X says it is closing operations in Brazil due to judge's content orders

Re:X says it is closing operations in Brazil due to judge's ... by ilikehurdles on Saturday August 17, 2024 @02:02PM (#41276536)

A. This is the dissent from Sotomayor, panned by pretty much every major legal figure. It is not a ruling, it is not binding, and it is not necessarily accurate. Just like, I don't know, listen to a Supreme Court podcast if you're not going to read the ruling [1].

B. That has nothing to do with the power of the Supreme Court relative to Brazil's. Our Supreme Court doesn't arrest people or order the military around.

[1]: https://thedispatch.com/podcast/advisoryopinions/trump-is-ab...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:X says it is closing operations in Brazil due to judge's ... by anigbrowl on Saturday August 17, 2024 @09:13PM (#41279383)

It was not 'panned by pretty much every major legal figure'. And yes I read the whole opinion as well as the dissents.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:X says it is closing operations in Brazil due to judge's ... by Izkata on Saturday August 17, 2024 @09:22PM (#41279413)

The immunity is for official duties in his role as president, which doesn't include those examples.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:X says it is closing operations in Brazil due to judge's ... by anigbrowl on Saturday August 17, 2024 @09:48PM (#41279530)

And Sotomayor correctly pointed out that it's trivially easy to assert that any given action was an official duty, thereby gaining the benefit of presumptive immunity pending a court's detailed determination.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:X says it is closing operations in Brazil due to judge's ... by Izkata on Saturday August 17, 2024 @09:20PM (#41279409)

Also C) such immunity can still be removed by impeachment.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:X says it is closing operations in Brazil due to judge's ... by anigbrowl on Saturday August 17, 2024 @09:49PM (#41279532)

Sure, unless a whole political party is corrupted.

[ Parent | on HN ]