General Category > Editorial/Opinion/Blogs
Jonathan Turley> Oral arguments suggest the Supreme Court’s about to plunge into a constitutional ab
mystery-ak:
Oral arguments suggest the Supreme Court’s about to plunge into a constitutional abyss in Trump immunity case
By Social Links for Jonathan Turley
Published April 25, 2024, 5:06 p.m. ET
Writer Ray Bradbury once said, “Living at risk is jumping off the cliff and building your wings on the way down.”
In Thursday’s case before the Supreme Court on the immunity of former President Donald Trump, nine justices appear to be feverishly working with feathers and glue on a plunge into a constitutional abyss.
It has been almost 50 years since the high court ruled presidents have absolute immunity from civil lawsuits in Nixon v. Fitzgerald.
The court held ex-President Richard Nixon had such immunity for acts taken “within the ‘outer perimeter’ of his official responsibility.”
Yet in 1974’s United States v. Nixon, the court ruled a president is not immune from a criminal subpoena. Nixon was forced to comply with a subpoena from special counsel Leon Jaworski for his White House tapes in the Watergate scandal.
Since then, the court has avoided any significant ruling on the extension of immunity to a criminal case — until now.
more
https://nypost.com/2024/04/25/opinion/oral-arguments-suggest-the-supreme-courts-about-to-plunge-into-a-constitutional-abyss-in-trump-immunity-case/
DefiantMassRINO:
The United States Constitution is antithesis of Europe's "Divine Right of Kings" and "Absolute Right of Kings".
Which Article, Section, Clause, or Amendment of the US Constitution enumerates that the President is absolutely immune from prosecution for all potential crimes committed while holding Office?
We are allegedly a nation of laws. Laws are written. Show us the piece of paper, the page, the paragraph, the sentence, and the written words that grant the Office of President, or the Holder of the Office of President, absolute immunity?
The Office of the President only has the powers provided to it by the US Constitution, or delegated to the Executive by Laws of Congress. If it ain't in writting, it's bull$h!t.
Cyber Liberty:
--- Quote from: DefiantMassRINO on April 26, 2024, 03:11:45 pm ---The United States Constitution is antithesis of Europe's "Divine Right of Kings" and "Absolute Right of Kings".
Which Article, Section, Clause, or Amendment of the US Constitution enumerates that the President is absolutely immune from prosecution for all potential crimes committed while holding Office?
We are allegedly a nation of laws. Laws are written. Show us the piece of paper, the page, the paragraph, the sentence, and the written words that grant the Office of President, or the Holder of the Office of President, absolute immunity?
The Office of the President only has the powers provided to it by the US Constitution, or delegated to the Executive by Laws of Congress. If it ain't in writting, it's bull$h!t.
--- End quote ---
In the context of the article, you would be on the side of "No immunity, whatsoever." I can't wait for the Obama and Biden trials.
Maj. Bill Martin:
--- Quote from: DefiantMassRINO on April 26, 2024, 03:11:45 pm ---The United States Constitution is antithesis of Europe's "Divine Right of Kings" and "Absolute Right of Kings".
Which Article, Section, Clause, or Amendment of the US Constitution enumerates that the President is absolutely immune from prosecution for all potential crimes committed while holding Office?
We are allegedly a nation of laws. Laws are written. Show us the piece of paper, the page, the paragraph, the sentence, and the written words that grant the Office of President, or the Holder of the Office of President, absolute immunity?
The Office of the President only has the powers provided to it by the US Constitution, or delegated to the Executive by Laws of Congress. If it ain't in writing, it's bull$h!t.
--- End quote ---
So if some local sheriff decides to toss a sitting President into jail for 120 days for alleged littering, he can do it? Because I see nothing explicit in the Constitution preventing that.
I think common law sovereign immunity should apply unless expressly disavowed in the Constitution.
DefiantMassRINO:
We need to codify common law. Common law and precedent are legal silly putty.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version