Trump immunity case: Supreme Court rules
ex-presidents have substantial protection
from prosecution
Fox News,
by
Brooke Singman
Original Article
Posted By: Dreadnought,
7/1/2024 10:58:02 AM
The Supreme Court ruled Monday in Trump v. United States that a former president has substantial immunity from prosecution for official acts committed while in office, but not for unofficial acts.
The Court sent the matter back down to a lower court, as the justices did not apply the ruling to whether or not former President Trump is immune from prosecution regarding actions related to efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. The question stemmed from Special Counsel Jack Smith’s federal election interference case in which he charged former President Trump with conspiracy to defraud the United States; conspiracy to obstruct
Post Reply
Reminder: “WE ARE A SALON AND NOT A SALOON”
Your thoughts, comments, and ideas are always welcome here. But we ask you to please be mindful and respectful. Threatening or crude language doesn't persuade anybody and makes the conversation less enjoyable for fellow L.Dotters.
Reply 1 - Posted by:
Jethro bo 7/1/2024 11:32:00 AM (No. 1747305)
Poor, poor Diaper Joe, Merritless Garland and criminal Jackie Smith. They all look like clowns right after the cigar blew up in their face. I'm mildly surprised that the 3 activist on the court voted against immunity since their hero Obambi could be tried for murder had the Supreme Joke not granted immunity.
15 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
davew 7/1/2024 11:36:41 AM (No. 1747312)
Everything that Trump did was to defend the Constitution from a botched election. Everything his staff and supporters did to assist that effort was also intended to protect the Constitution. None of that is for personal gain.
17 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
DVC 7/1/2024 11:39:20 AM (No. 1747316)
So....let's get a bucket of tar, some feathers and a rail for Mr. Smith. He's due a party where he's the guest of honor.
14 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
skacmar 7/1/2024 11:41:17 AM (No. 1747318)
OFFICIAL ACTS! The President should be immune from prosecution for act taken when performing official acts of their job. This should include contesting questionable election results and actions taken in the performance of election duties by others in order to uphold the Constitution. Others will argue that Trump's contesting the election was not an official act; it was personal because he lost. Questioning election results is not illegal. Democrats do it/ have done it every election for years. The President should be held liable for prosecution for acts not related to his job as President. Ordering another country to fire a prosecutor in order to get foreign aid when they are investigating you son would be a good example of something that may be prosecuted.
26 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
Daisymay 7/1/2024 11:46:24 AM (No. 1747320)
I hope they can somehow stop the NY Judge from sentencing Trump! And how many Millions did Trump have to pay them? He should get his money back!
15 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
Maggie2u 7/1/2024 11:50:23 AM (No. 1747323)
Give it a year and all those screaming hysterically about this ruling will be defending it when Congress starts investigating Biden, Obama and Clinton's corruption.
16 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
HicoKid 7/1/2024 11:51:14 AM (No. 1747324)
Halleluja. SCOTUS does the minimum expected. Ask the three hipocritical dissenting judges if they are immune from their offcial acts. Remanding this back to the corrupt, commie, partisan, Judge Chutkan will only result in a guilty verdict saying that all of Jack Smith's charges are for personal acts because they were political. It should take about a week.
7 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
chagrined 7/1/2024 12:02:38 PM (No. 1747336)
Let's see a count of hands. How many think this is going to slow these lawless ***holes down? I'm guessing they'll continue to trample on the Constitution and any laws thereof that get in their way!
7 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
Birddog 7/1/2024 12:02:46 PM (No. 1747337)
Even in her dissent the ruling is Clear..."This gives Trump All of the immunity he asked for and more"...by HER own standards, these charges are null and void.
4 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
DiegoDude 7/1/2024 12:15:04 PM (No. 1747350)
Wonder if illegal special counsel Jack Smith's documents case goes up in smoke as well?
2 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
padiva 7/1/2024 12:17:21 PM (No. 1747352)
H-E-L-L-O Hillary Clinton and VP Biden.
No stone will be left unturned.
2 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
Ditto1958 7/1/2024 12:46:38 PM (No. 1747388)
Correct result but sad because if it had been Biden it would have been a 9-0 decision. Those 3 libs should be ashamed. Partisan hacks.
3 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
WhamDBambam 7/1/2024 1:15:00 PM (No. 1747423)
This also shields Biden, Obama, Clinton from much. Arguably, most of the bad stuff they did will not be deemed “official acts.”
2 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
felixcat 7/1/2024 3:09:46 PM (No. 1747530)
So is misusing executive branch agencies and departments to go after your political opposition an "official act" ?
1 person likes this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
Rumblehog 7/1/2024 4:04:55 PM (No. 1747565)
I was on our HOA Board for 11 years and our board members had an "indemnity clause" protecting us from anyone from suing us for doing our job. Most every organization, both civil and governmental, has an Indemnity Clause for it's employees and its leaders. I'm somewhat shocked that our POTUS didn't have that spelled out somewhere.
0 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
mifla 7/2/2024 7:18:25 AM (No. 1747957)
The lamentations of the liberals are music to my ears. Thank you Harry Reid.
Looking forward to Judge Cannon reading the riot act to Jack Smith.
Also looking forward to all the counter lawsuits brought by Trump upon his persecutors.
0 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Dreadnought"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)