• @Akuden
    link
    -1525 days ago

    deleted by creator

    • @Nightwingdragon
      link
      English
      117
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      Who says he can’t? The Supreme Court just said that he’s immune from “official acts” without even defining what that would mean. Who determines what is and isn’t an official act? The President? The Supreme Court? Right now, as this ruling is worded, all bets are off. There’s nothing stopping a sitting President from just arbitrarily declaring someone as a threat to national security and having them picked off by ST6 as an “official act to prevent a terrorist attack against the United States”, then just having the details classified.

      Having something criminal declared as an “official act” is piss-easy, especially when you’re in charge of the branch making the decision and you have one of the other branches in your back pocket, possibly both.

      • @UnpopularCrow
        link
        485 days ago

        Don’t bother with this “user”. Look at their comment history. The person showed up today to defend this obvious act against democracy. My guess is a Russian/Chinese misinformation promoter.

        • @Akuden
          link
          -835 days ago

          deleted by creator

          • Lightor
            link
            245 days ago

            You’re trying to play it off like a joke, but that should really trigger some introspection.

          • GladiusB
            link
            145 days ago

            Good. Fuck off then.

          • @TrickDacy
            link
            105 days ago

            Probably is a total coincidence that you’re saying this here.

      • @Akuden
        link
        -785 days ago

        deleted by creator

        • @Sonicdemon86
          link
          English
          445 days ago

          The laws about that were just thrown out the window with this ruling. Everything is an official act as long as he was president when he stated it to he done. Ordering fries from McDonald’s is now an official act as well.

          • @Akuden
            link
            -74
            edit-2
            5 days ago

            deleted by creator

            • Lightor
              link
              26
              edit-2
              5 days ago

              You just showed us you didn’t lol

        • @Buffalox
          link
          255 days ago

          If it were, Trump would have been behind bars years ago.

    • @blazera
      link
      English
      605 days ago

      Trumps own legal team has described political assassinations as qualifying as an official act as president

      • @Akuden
        link
        -535 days ago

        deleted by creator

        • @blazera
          link
          English
          515 days ago

          It is! in the dissenting opinion in which Sotomayor explicitly describes this ruling as granting immunity for political assassinations

    • @PM_Your_Nudes_Please
      cake
      link
      525 days ago

      Shoutout to Voyager for implementing Apollo’s new account marker. It makes spotting trolls really easy.

      • @Akuden
        link
        -245 days ago

        deleted by creator

        • @potpotato
          link
          145 days ago

          “Congress may not criminalize the president’s conduct in carrying out the responsibilities of the executive branch under the Constitution” makes pretty much anything fair fucking game.

          • @Akuden
            link
            -215 days ago

            “The president enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official. The President is not above the law,”

            I don’t understand how you can confuse this sentence. People act like the president can commit any crime they want. That is categorically false. Crimes committed in the name in the highest office of the land are not o in an official capacity.

            The U.S. Constitution includes several provisions that limit the powers of the president and prevent the president from committing crimes without consequences:

            Article I, Section 2 and Section 3: These sections provide the House of Representatives the power to impeach the president and the Senate the power to try and convict the president. Impeachment is a process by which the president can be removed from office for committing “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Article II, Section 4: This section specifically states that the president, vice president, and all civil officers of the United States can be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

            Article II, Section 1, Clause 8: The president must take an oath of office to “faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” This oath implies a legal and ethical obligation to adhere to the law and Constitution.

            Checks and Balances: The Constitution establishes a system of checks and balances, whereby the legislative and judicial branches can limit the actions of the executive branch. Congress can pass laws, override presidential vetoes, and control the budget, while the judiciary can review the constitutionality of presidential actions through judicial review.

            Together, these provisions and principles ensure that the president is subject to the rule of law and can be held accountable for criminal actions.

            • @potpotato
              link
              215 days ago

              Nothing you wrote ensures anything.

              Trump was impeached twice with no consequence.

              “Official acts” is arbitrary.

              • @Akuden
                link
                -205 days ago

                deleted by creator

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  94 days ago

                  The problem here is that Trump stole and likely sold classified documents. This ruling now allows him to sell secrets that can cause grave danger to the country without consequence.

                  • @Akuden
                    link
                    -144 days ago

                    deleted by creator

            • @beebarfbadger
              link
              24 days ago

              So in other words, Trump can do whatever he wants as long as his cronies vote that it’s okay.

    • Butt Pirate
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      52
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      There’s some hyperbole in these threads for sure, but not a lot. The president can’t handwave away the bill of rights, because nothing in the constitution gives them that power.

      However, the president does have the authority as commander in chief of authorizing lethal force against individuals. If Biden authorized Seal Team 6 to execute Trump, that is in fact an official act that he has the authority to perform. Sure maybe it is technically not legal, but that doesn’t matter since the president has complete immunity from criminal law. The house could still draft articles of impeachment but the senate would be unable to remove the president because the president is immune to criminal proceedings.

      And if Trump wants to create an organization to round up and execute all the gays (and the Jews, of course), he has the power to do that; and with today’s ruling, he will never face consequences for doing so.

      Irreparable damage has been done to American democracy today.

      • @bashbeerbash
        link
        65 days ago

        The Christian Caliphate was birthed today, and Trump will be supreme Ayatollah

      • @Akuden
        link
        -66
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        deleted by creator

        • Fire Witch
          link
          fedilink
          415 days ago

          At this point you need to present your evidence that they can’t because SCROTUS literally said they can

          • @Akuden
            link
            -195 days ago

            At this point you’ve outed yourself as a partisan hack that is stuck in binary thinking.

            • @Hackworth
              link
              English
              135 days ago

              At this point, you’re a towel.

        • @WhatYouNeed
          link
          235 days ago

          But as an official act, the president can strip someone of citizenship.

            • @jordanlund
              shield
              M
              link
              34 days ago

              Removed, civility, ableist slur.

        • Butt Pirate
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          13
          edit-2
          5 days ago

          The supreme court Supreme Court Justices disagree with you, but OK I’ll bite.

          Why can’t a president kill an american citizen on american soil? Because it’s illegal? Do you understand that that that no longer applies to the president?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          35 days ago

          So you are saying he just has to wait until he leaves American soil? You’re right, that’s so inconvenient.

    • @Riccosuave
      link
      425 days ago

      The president can’t commit criminal acts and claim it was an official capacity, lol.

      What the fuck do you mean “lol”. That is PRECISELY what this ruling does. It removes criminal liability for anything that is done as an official act, which is entirely fucking subjective, and up to the interpretation of a corrupt, coopted judiciary. Get the fuck out of here with that bullshit.

      • @Akuden
        link
        -60
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        deleted by creator

        • @Riccosuave
          link
          235 days ago

          The stupidity of this statement truly strains belief given the actual verbiage in this ruling. May you suffer the full weight and consequences of that stupidity.

        • Jackie's Fridge
          link
          155 days ago

          And who decides how to interpret law and levy consequence? And whose pocket are they in?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          44 days ago

          A person of power cannot commit a crime and claim it was in official capacity, because the act itself is against the law and cannot be committed without consequence.

          This whole ruling is because of a person in power (Trump) who committed a crime (fake electors plot to overturn the 2020 election) and is claiming it as an official capacity of the office. That’s the whole point of the case which was appealed to the Supreme Court.

          So what consequence will Trump face for his crimes now based on this ruling?

          • @Akuden
            link
            -64 days ago

            deleted by creator

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      305 days ago

      You can organize a coup to overthrow the government and claim it’s an official act, there’s absolutely nothing stopping a president from claiming assassinations are an official act now. Hell, the commander in chief already organizes assassinations on foreign targets.

      The Democrats might not abuse this, but the Republicans will, and they have given themselves carte blanche to start killing political dissidents.

      • @TokenBoomer
        link
        75 days ago

        Is this fascism yet, or are we waiting for the trains to run on time?

        • @pivot_root
          link
          35 days ago

          I think we all know that one of those two things will never happen in the land of the free and home of the mass-produced automobile.

      • @Akuden
        link
        -445 days ago

        deleted by creator

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          275 days ago

          Your logic doesn’t even follow. Why would the president need immunity for a non-criminal act? Think about it for like 2 seconds dude.

          • @Akuden
            link
            -385 days ago

            deleted by creator

    • @Rakonat
      link
      English
      195 days ago

      Supreme court literally just said he could by saying Jan 6 was fine for President to incite

    • @Malek061
      link
      115 days ago

      Al-Aulaqi v. Obama made kill lists for Americans legal.

    • @Buffalox
      link
      9
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      If they are traitors and terrorists, he may have to send them to Guantanamo.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      45 days ago

      While i agree with you, it’s a huge grey area. Like Biden could have trump assassinated and then claim that his constitutional duties require him to protect the cotus from enemies both foreign and domestic.

      Official act or not?

      • @Akuden
        link
        -115 days ago

        deleted by creator

          • @Mirshe
            link
            85 days ago

            In fact, it would have to be the DoJ or Congress that did so - Biden could order the DoJ to stop, and arguably could have anyone in Congress killed or jailed without trial by stating that they presented a clear danger to democracy by trying to impeach him.