SCOTUS rules on presidential immunity …
… and says about what was expected. The idea is that immunity is presumed but certainly not automatic, and can be rebutted.
Here’s Professor Jacobson’s take:
The SCOTUS Opinion pretty much came down as I predicted after the oral argument (link above):
“I think they will simply find in response to their question that there is presidential immunity for official acts while done in office and send it back down to the district court to opine on whether the charges in this case involve official acts or not.”
Some selective passages from the majority opinion which may be relevant to how this plays out.
As to charge of unlawfully colluding with DOJ officials, absolute immunity:
“The indictment’s allegations that the requested investigations were “sham[s]” or proposed for an improper purpose do not divest the President of exclusive authority over the investigative and prosecutorial functions of the Justice Department and its officials. App. 186–187, Indictment ¶10(c). And the President cannot be prosecuted for conduct within his exclusive constitutional authority. Trump is therefore absolutely immune from prosecution for the alleged conduct involving his discussions with Justice Department officials.”
As to the charge of unlawfully pressuring Pence, presumptive immunity:
“Whenever the President and Vice President discuss their official responsibilities, they engage in official conduct. Presiding over the January 6 certification proceeding at which Members of Congress count the electoral votes is a constitutional and statutory duty of the Vice President. Art. II, §1, cl. 3; Amdt. 12; 3 U. S. C. §15. The indictment’s allegations that Trump attempted to pressure the Vice President to take particular acts in connection with his role at the certification proceeding thus involve official conduct, and Trump is at least presumptively immune from prosecution for such conduct.”
The question then becomes whether that presumption of immunity is rebutted under the circumstances.
Please read the whole thing for further details.
Also, here’s Ace’s take. It’s long, but the gist is that this decision will almost certainly delay the case past the election.
So, since no one (no one I’ve read, anyway) predicted a decision that would grant immunity for every single act a person performs as president no matter what, this is about as good a result for Trump as could be expected. And in the larger sense, I believe it’s the generally correct result.
Be careful with Ace. He and the AoS website are useful, but proceed with caution. I used to be a regular contributor to AoS comment threads way back in the day. But I quit some time ago, for reasons I won’t go into. Except to say that Ace is kind of a dick.
I want to know his name/true identity. I seem to recall reading somewhere that his first name is Kevin. Last name still unknown. I remember when he passed the bar exam and moved from NYC to Boston for a job in a law firm. I remember when he quit the practice of law to blog full-time. I remember seeing a couple videos showing him taking part in political panel discussions. He was a short chubby guy with a bushy beard and coke-bottle glasses and a thin voice. In other words, a nebish. In the comment threads we called him “Wookie” because of the resemblance.
Not every presidential official act is wrong. But all can be contested to make the POTUS prove they’re not until we have a dozen running simultaneously. If the president is a republican. If a democrat….mox nix.
So this spares us infinite lawfare.
it was a pretty sensible ruling, of course the hot takes have been legendary, the dissents honestly would have sent one back to one L
kimberlin’s goons tried to suss out the Ewok’s identity, for a long time, I think the
Ewok did settle re the lawfare campaign that was waged against anyone who would dare note his twisted cv,
Thomas’s decision was very pointed on the manifest unconstitutionality, of the authority behind Jack Smith, seeing as the Independent Council statute is in abeyance,
as with the three judge panel supervisory
framework,
some of the hot takes, came from neal katyal who has a flexible standard about criminality, he defended ubl’s driver, Hamdan, who had a bazooka in his trunk, yet he is yelling about ‘insurrection’ with a totally unarmed cohort,
now it’s arguable that taking care that the laws are dutifully carried out re elections is an official official, but well that was outside the scope,
“So this spares us infinite lawfare”
Which is exactly why most Dems will disagree with the decision, which will lead to lawfare directed against the Supreme Court – which is ridiculous almost by definition but that’s never stopped them before.
who I was speaking off
https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2024/07/01/katyal-scotus-immunity-ruling-blueprint-for-how-to-end-the-rule-of-law/
of course there is also the irony of the awlaki case, rubber stamped by harold koh
who thought waterboarding was too much,
Reaction by our opponents? Will Cain sums it up as Left propaganda spinning. The “No one is above the law” on cue. Like Tourette’s.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIzHcQklhlY
The Lawfare channel on YouTube hosted a roundtable on the Presidential Immunity ruling. Recent law students and at least two law profs I believe — including one at University of Texas Law.
The online discussion of the livestream captures the schadenfreuda of the Left today EXCERPTS, with some pushback by maybe 10% — often erudite critics I’m leaving you you to peruse:
Brian Mould
What a truly corrupt supreme court!! Supremely corrupt, truly!
Ylteicz
banana republic 2024
Tom Nilsson
Im shocked the supreme court would rule like this its so far from what the washington supreme [DC Appeals, he means] court ruled.
Obadiah Hotep (B1)
After All Amerikkka This Is What You’ve Brought Upon Yourself, With Your Racism, Oppression, Suppression And Alienation Of Basic Human Rights You’ve Allowed And Promoted Against Melanated People!!
Jose Sisyowma
This gives full carblaunch for a ” Selfishly motivated” President to take full advantage of the laws WE ALL live by daily as a Civil society.. this is BAD.
e2247
• A binding code of ethics for justices to ensure accountability and restore integrity; and • Formal investigations of Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Brett Kavanaugh
Paul Schrum
Looks like we need a “Judicial Infrastructure bill” to add more courtroom space so we can add more judges at every level. Between this and the elimination of Chevron Friday.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_GrK6bOIpY
If these (ie, YT online live commenters — NOT the participants who are sad or “shell shocked” and more restrained) are our future lawyers, I fear for our future.
Leftist are, as usual, not thinking clearly. Do they really want Obama prosecuted, or Biden prosecuted, for actions taken while president with which a conservative AG disagrees? Insanity.
you never go full avenatti, he was the savant that pushed court packing early on, around 2017, autocucumber is on the fritz,
of course they don’t want obama prosecuted, and well they know they would’nt be in panem central or gotham doesn’t obama have office there, etc or the windy city,
the people in the hollywood square boxes are the ones who have promised incredible crimes and misdemeanors, people who watch them, think they know what they are talking about,
but after mueller, the first and second impeachments the delta house follies you would think people would know better
again ben wittes was against military tribunals which have been in effect for two hundred years, and wanted another special tribunal for terrorists,
The three female Leftists on SCOTUS have become looney, totally hysterical and delusional fantasy-prone. Thank God there are only three of these harridans as Justices. Sotomayor’s statement is one that only a deranged person could utter or write.
MSNBC’s Wallace on SCOTUS Immunity Ruling: Trump Could Target Me, People Will Flee the Country
Indeed. Best get out.
Now.
This was Vox’s hot take:
Insane. Evidently written by 12-year-olds.
“………..it is very likely that a sitting president can order the military to assassinate his political rivals without facing any criminal consequences for doing so.”
– From Jimmy’s comment.
That’s projection if we ever saw it. Biden is covered by this ruling. Is he going to order Seal Team Six to take out Trump? The Dems are saying it would be legal now. I’m no lawyer, but even I don’t believe that is what the SCOTUS opinion says.
More of their hobgoblin stuff. The only argument the Dems have is that we must be very afraid of Trump and this boogeyman SCOTUS. It’s the same tactic that they use for climate change – FEAR.
Bill Barr gave a good analysis of the SC decision and why he is voting for Trump. Neil Cavuto gave Barr every opportunity to trash Trump and denigrate the SC and Barr refused to play the game.
His answer to the Seal Team nonsense begins around the 2:45 mark. I think it’s worth listening to the 17 minute interview.
Bill Barr: The Supreme Court’s opinions have been ‘bang on’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMstzTbZLx8
Yes, it’s all about stoking more fear, the Left’s go-to, default action.
So Biden had to come out swinging this evening, to make it seem like the immunity ruling was another nail in “Democracy’s coffin”.
Another undoing of Dobb’s, by God!
To distract from all the hubbub about his lame debate!
SMH
Wow , Bill Barr’s opinion!
Good on him!
He’s trying to redeem himself, lately.
A article at American Thinker says Amy C-B sent the Marxists a Red Flag telling them find actions not on official business.
And of course the Marxists will find actions that could maybe possibly be official but it’s really political so can be charged.
IrishOtter nice to see you
Every election some Lefties vow to move out of the country if so and so wins. Well so and so wins and the same Lefties say we were kidding, I had a friend who replied ” we weren’t”!
I’d encourage everyone to read the opinion that Roberts wrote for the majority. It is very good, one of his best, which is wonderful considering the magnitude of this case. His reasoning and logic, contrasted with those of the dissenters, is astounding.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf
They sent the fbi swat team to maralago we forget we dont
Tell bill barr to shove that bagpipe where the sun dont shine
Cicero at 8:52 pm – Right on. I am continually amazed at how unabashedly political the progressives are. Their behavior is not befitting a Supreme Court justice. They cheapen the institution with their juvenile nonsense. So Sotomayor cries in her chambers when decisions don’t go her way? It’s almost enough to make me buy one of those “bitter leftist tears” coffee mugs.
Marlene – Bill Barr is not trying to redeem himself. He’s been the same guy from the beginning. He respects the rule of law. He is a conservative. I watched the whole 17 minute interview. He really didn’t say anything complimentary about Trump. He’s just reached the conclusion that another four years of Biden/Harris would be so damaging that it is worth dealing with Trump and the potential damage that he would do. His reasoning is that one or other other is going to be president and the voter has to choose which one will do the least damage. That’s not much different from my thinking. Things like Title IX, Israel, and lawfare have caused me to change my thinking on that balance over the past few months, but the analysis is the same. It never ceases to amaze me how Trumpers (and Trump himself) think they can achieve addition by subtraction. Take the vote. Take the votes of double haters who, for whatever reason, decide to vote for Trump. For a lot of potential Trump voters, this election is still a close call, if not between Biden and Trump, then definitely between Trump and staying home or voting third party. Welcome those folks, don’t insult them.
On the merits of the case – the decision seems reasonable, but I believe we were all better off when the prospect of presidential criminal immunity was still hypothetical rather than concrete. The fault here lies with Biden, Garland, Smith, the district judge, and the D.C. Circuit. By bringing weak, silly charges against Trump and rushing them through the system to try to get a trial before the election, they’ve forced the Court to make a decision on a bad set of facts and an underdeveloped record. We’re all worse off for that. And now the three prog’s “politician in robes” act further weakens the institutions that are actually the bulwark of the republic, if not of “our democracy” itself.
Twenty gope senators voted for garland at least that many for monaco and clark they are all complicit in this sham you insist on honoring marxists are like locusts in Russia which was feudal it was bad enough but in the country of my birth the destroyed the most advanced economy in latin america
Since faucis home made brew killed a million people and somehow hes unaccountable it made marc elias ballot avalanche possible although the collusion by brian kemp was necessary murdochs boys taking a dive on dominion
Bauxite, for once, didn’t let CC™ dominate his thoughts.
Regarding Bill Barr, he was remarkably ineffective when faced with BLA and Antifa insurrection in the summer and fall of 2020. Now he realizes that the Brandon junta and leftists are a real serious threat. Congratulations Bill, where were you in the clutch?
Om, yes I agree Barr didn’t do enough as AG. Seemed afraid to look like a strong law & order guy, as the left were always willing to scream that good decisions were proof Barr was in Trump’s pocket.
Also, Barr could have helped support those people (including me) saying the election fraud wasn’t mythical & deserved better from judges dismissing cases without a glance at evidence.
Even if you agree that all those cases’ plaintiffs had no standing, I wish Barr had at least made strong statements to explain to The People that dismissal didn’t mean no merit.
He was a coward who could have educated ignorant people, in his position.
Bauxite,
I’m not an “always Trumper”, I’m a “policies matter” person, 100%.
I’m experienced at holding my nose to vote for candidates in Austin. Voting for the best of flawed humans.
That said, even on some personal traits, I’d pick Trump over Biden any & every chance.
Barr serves a purpose similar to Turley or Dershowitz. When Barr says Trump did good things in his first term– this has the potential of persuading undecideds.
So here I finally found someone to explain how the presidential immunity case could possibly affect the Bragg/Merchan felony convictions. Evidence which Merchan allowed included tweets and conversations between Trump and White House staff after Trump’s inauguration. These are subject to either absolute or presumptive immunity, and the immunity status must be determined before trial. This should call for a mistrial, according to this analysis by someone who says he is a former US attorney.
https://twitter.com/JayTownAlabama/status/1808231244020473964
Huh. When President Obama ordered the targeted assassination of not one, but two US citizens, one of whom was a minor, nobody batted an eye (Anwar Al-Alawki and son). Now we’re supposed to panic? If anyone should be worried, it’s Donald Trump. If, as the hysterics would have us believe, the President can now assassinate political rivals legally…
@ Drogo > “f anyone should be worried, it’s Donald Trump. If, as the hysterics would have us believe, the President can now assassinate political rivals legally…”
My first thought exactly: the Democrats always project onto Republicans what they would like to do themselves.
Fortunately, they would have to go OUTSIDE military channels to do it:
https://redstate.com/wardclark/2024/07/02/armys-elite-delta-force-troopers-assassination-of-political-opponents-an-unlawful-order-n2176290
Of course, for the Democrats, finding a willing thug won’t be hard.