OUCH! Supreme Court Majority ZINGS Sonia
Sotomayor in Blistering Opinion
Gateway Pundit,
by
Christina Laila
Original Article
Posted By: Imright,
7/2/2024 1:41:06 PM
The Supreme Court on Monday ruled 6-3 that Trump has absolute immunity for his core Constitutional powers.
Former presidents are entitled to at least a presumption of immunity for their official acts, according to the high court.
Sotomayor proved how stupid she is in her hysterical dissent. “The President is now a king above the law,” Sotomayor said as she echoed Judge Florence Pan’s SEAL Team 6 assassination hypothetical.
“Orders the Navy SEAL Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power?” Immune,” Sotomayor wrote in her dissent.
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:
JHHolliday 7/2/2024 1:55:39 PM (No. 1748235)
Biden should actually be pleased about the decision. This immunity only applies to official acts. Without the immunity, Biden could be tried in the Hague for several crimes like furnishing weapons to Israel that ended up causing the deaths of Gazan citizens or drone strikes with collateral damage to civilians. Trump still can't rob your local 7-11 for no good reason despite the media claiming he is now "above the law".
16 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
volksford 7/2/2024 2:10:02 PM (No. 1748244)
I get the feeling the woman ain't too bright.
32 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
earlybird 7/2/2024 2:21:33 PM (No. 1748253)
I thought she was dreadfully ill Can affect the brain too. Or is she just stupid. Or is on the take like the other Libs?
15 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
Ruhn 7/2/2024 2:21:47 PM (No. 1748254)
In the biz, nobody calls a certain Tier 1 Special Warfare organization "SEAL Team 6". Only outsiders with a misunderstanding of what they've heard (attempting to sound smarter than they really are) only reveal their ignorance...like in a dissenting opinion in a SCOTUS case.
16 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
DVC 7/2/2024 3:14:44 PM (No. 1748281)
Her opinion was absolutely the blatherings of an idiot, showing without any doubt that she is both a political hack and an affirmative action justice who is not anywhere in the mental league of most justices.
20 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
DVC 7/2/2024 3:25:51 PM (No. 1748289)
Actually, #1, this would have exactly zero affect on what the foreign courts might do. This is related only to US laws, has zero impact on international craziness that those "International Court of Justice" clowns play around at. They could still do what you suggest.
8 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
BocaLaura 7/2/2024 3:36:51 PM (No. 1748294)
Sotomayor is a slave to the woke marxist narrative.
9 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
Muguy 7/2/2024 3:58:38 PM (No. 1748304)
So much for the "wise latina" schtick.
Just another activist judge appointed by another activist.
14 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
cedar 7/2/2024 4:27:29 PM (No. 1748315)
The three lefties on the Supreme Court have NO respect for the Constitution or their colleagues or the Office of the President. Instead, they turn to the fear mongering reasoning (if you can call it that) of the Democrats who put them there. What a pathetic bunch! They deserve the tongue-lashing.
12 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
Sully 7/2/2024 4:37:28 PM (No. 1748321)
They're just not making wise Latinas like they used to.
18 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
JoElla Bee 7/2/2024 4:39:04 PM (No. 1748323)
The ending of the excellent @thevivafrei video, at the bottom of the article, has a clip of Justice Thomas’s gloriously truthful and magnificently memorable 1991 “high tech lynching speech” to the despicable committee members of his confirmation hearing - the most egregiously despicable of whom was Joseph Biden, and that’s saying something. (I’m so glad the video zoomed in on him in this clip of Justice Thomas’s speech.)
Thank you,Gateway Pundit for including this video in the article. Thank you, Viva Frei for the excellent analysis! Justice Thomas is my best loved & most admired favorite too!
9 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
Kate318 7/2/2024 4:51:34 PM (No. 1748333)
Brilliant, #10.
7 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
jeffkinnh 7/2/2024 5:07:07 PM (No. 1748343)
It is absurd and tragic that a Supreme Court Justice could become so hysterical and step completely outside the structure of the law. Roberts is exactly right, "the dissents are instead content to leave the preservation of our system of separated powers up to the good faith of prosecutors". AND it is that well balanced separation of powers that prevents abuses of power that the "Wise Latina" frets about. I would suggest that the liberal justices need to go back for a Constitutional Law refresher course but I don't think it would do them any good.
The Left reduces law to the shear exercise of will by a prosecutor, judge, and maybe a jury. If we say you are guilty, you are. Even though there is nothing written anywhere that would have informed you that you are breaking the law. This is a mockery of law that serves the people. It is law that serves the state and enslaves the people. Sotomayor doesn't get to say what the law is, only interpret if and how it applies in the cases that come before her and if the law obeys the framework of the Constitution.
We don't need Sotomayor to save us from Seal Team 6. We do need to be protected from activist judges and a government bureaucracy that functions outside of established law.
6 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
Starboard_side 7/2/2024 5:09:49 PM (No. 1748345)
FTA: (majority of it if you didn't read it)
Chief Roberts slapped down Sotomayor for ignoring the Constitution.
“Unable to muster any meaningful textual or historical support, the principal dissent suggests that there is an “established understanding” that “former Presidents are answerable to the criminal law for their official acts.” Post, at 9. Conspicuously absent is mention of the fact that since the founding, no President has ever faced criminal charges—let alone for his conduct in office. And accordingly no court has ever been faced with the question of a President’s immunity from prosecution. All that our Nation’s practice establishes on the subject is silence. Coming up short on reasoning, the dissents repeatedly level variations of the accusation that the Court has rendered the President “above the law.”” Roberts wrote.
(the article actually has below in bold for emphasis)
“The dissents’ positions in the end boil down to ignoring the Constitution’s separation of powers and the Court’s precedent and instead fear mongering on the basis of extreme hypotheticals about a future where the President “feels empowered to violate federal criminal law.” Post, at 18 (opinion of SOTOMAYOR, J.); see post, at 26, 29–30; post, at 8–9, 10, 12, 16, 20–21 (opinion of JACKSON, J.). The dissents overlook the more likely prospect of an Executive Branch that cannibalizes itself, with each successive President free to prosecute his predecessors, yet unable to boldly and fearlessly carry out his duties for fear that he may be next. For instance, Section 371—which has been charged in this case—is a broadly worded criminal statute that can cover “‘any conspiracy for the purpose of impairing, obstructing or defeating the lawful function of any department of Government.’” Roberts wrote.
6 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
AbingtonJim 7/2/2024 7:17:58 PM (No. 1748418)
I hope she does an RGB, sticks with the SCOTUS gig until February 1, 2025, and then retires so Trump can replace her with a Constitutionalist judge.
3 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
smokincol 7/2/2024 8:09:20 PM (No. 1748462)
have we found out who leaked the decision that collapsed Roe v Wade?
3 people like this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
mifla 7/3/2024 6:17:42 AM (No. 1748640)
Rumor has it that there is a lot of animosity between the liberal and conservative judges. This confirms it.
Going to work each day in the Supreme Court must be a riot.
2 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Imright"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)