The President Can Now Assassinate You, Officially
The President Can Now Assassinate You, Officially
www.thenation.com
The President Can Now Assassinate You, Officially
136 comments
-
-
Under this new standard, a president can go on a four-to-eight-year crime spree and then retire from public life, never to be held accountable.
Uhhh, that already happened.
-
Yeah, but now the Supreme Court said that's perfectly ok and totally legal.
-
Well, we've already had a president assassinate US citizens, so let's rev up those predators and go looking for whatever billionaire's yacht Coney Barret, Kavanuahh, and Roberts are chilling on
-
Except the extreme court gets to decide who is immune and what actions are okay.
-
-
Most presidents have done this. Whether it be bombing countries they're not at war with, trafficking drugs to enrich the war machine by arming enemies of the state, or invading foreign countries and committing war crimes based on their own manufactured lies.
-
bombing countries they’re not at war with
Fun fact. We haven't officially declared war since 1941.
Korea, Vietnam, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, and now Ukraine? All NATO led military interventions or AUMF policing actions. No articles of war required.
trafficking drugs to enrich the war machine
One of the craziest "America just be like that" stories I've ever heard was the time Bush Sr set up a drug buy right outside the White House, by having the DEA extort a teenager picked up for selling crack on the opposite side of town to show up on Pennsylvania Avenue the night of a State of the Union Address and do a straw sale to another agent, just so he could talk about it on national TV an hour later like it happened organically.
Bush dangling a bag of crack on national TV and saying in his Father-Knows-Best voice that we need to go full-on Phoenix Program across every major American city, because of his little kabuki crack sale, is one of those "burned into my conscience" factoids that really changed how I saw our country operating.
-
We're going to find those WMDs any day now. pepper sprays Occupy Wall Street protester
-
-
-
Except for the whole retiring from public life part. I wish Trump would just retire from life entirely.
-
-
Would this same ruling have happened if Trump wasn’t involved? No, I don’t think so.
Stop the
stealoverthrow.-
So now Biden can do what trump did and not certify the next president using fake electors.
And if he can’t break the law, can’t he illegally introduce a new law that makes all this presidential law breaking illegal?
-
How would he "illegally introduce a new law"? He could issue a decree but it would be meaningless because nothing gives a president the power to make laws.
-
Correct. There's absolutely nothing stopping Biden from doing exactly what Trump already tried and failed to do. He could put pressure on Governors to "find x number of votes", submit a fake slate of electors to cast doubt on the results, outright threaten people if they don't comply with his wishes. I'm sure this SCOTUS will find a way to interpret any of Biden's would-be illegal actions as actually illegal, but tiptoe around Trump's sedition and fraud.
I can't believe that the prevailing opinion of the times is that the president can literally break the law, even ones specifically meant to bind them and only them such as campaign finance laws, and be immune from consequences under almost any circumstance as long as the court says it's official. Congress effectively can no longer act as a check against the Executive. Only the Judicial can say what is official or unofficial.
This isn't power anyone should have.
-
-
-
I heard a good argument that while these justices are appointed for life to be judges, it doesn’t specify which branch. Reappointment them to a lower court and appoint new justices. They voted for this let them reap the consequences. Outline enforceable ethics standards.
-
The rules of the Senate, as undermined by McConnell and inexplicably tolerated by Schumer ensure it won't happen.
That co-equal branches thing was nice while we had it.
-
Just dismiss the senators as official business. What still stands in the way of a total power grab by a US president?
As long as it's official business and they keep it official by officially removing all obstacles, they are legally perfectly in the clear. IANAL obviously, but total power seems just a matter of being audacious enough to grab it.
-
-
Move them to Florida or Alabama.
-
I think the more viable option is just packing the court but biden would have to get two Republicans to flip and all Democrats to agree. It's embarrassing he didn't do it when the Democrats had Senate in 2020
-
-
Its more like, the president can assassinate you if it is in the interest of the USA and not for the personal interest of the president.
So if ellected, Trump can assassinate all political competition, Putin-style, legally, but not Stormy Daniels
-
Who's to say that maintaining the dignity of the office of President is not in the interest of the US? She is impugning his reputation therefore making him look weak which could embolden our enemies. She must disappear for the good of all Americans. It's not hard to justify just about anything as an official act in the interest of the US.
-
If "maintaining the dignity of the office of President" is a core obligation of president, Trump could be impeached and convicted of that charge.
-
-
Not really. Exercise of a Presidential power, no matter the reason, is immune from prosecution. If it's legal to drop a bomb on ISIS it's legal to drop a bomb on a pornstar.
-
So Stormy Daniels will have to avenge democracy, Rambo style
-
I’d re-up Netflix to watch this movie.
-
-
But whose interests are "the interests of the USA?"
-
-
It's settled law so not to worry, they can just change their minds later when it doesn't benefit their conservative bosses.
-
Welcome back to another episode of "Where's Humanity Going to Shit Next?", where we tackle the depressing consequences of the actions of the human race to our beloved planet Earth. This episode we visit the US once again, where the president decides he now has the power to kill you himself if he feels like it.
Join us next time to see where humanity is really gonna shit next.
-
The President Can Now Legally Assassinate You, Officially if it Supports the SCOTUS Majority's Agenda
Anything Biden did would be determined to be "not official" by them because he's a Democrat.
-
Sounds like a reason for Biden to set a whole bunch of legal precedent while he's still president.
-
As I mentioned on another comment, there is no mechanism for the court to enforce that. The DOJ is under the President. Who will arrest the President? The SC may think this empowers them more, but it really does not.
-
The conservative court acts in tandem with the GOP. Any government organization run by them will provide the support.
-
-
The SCOTUS agenda is to collect maximum gratuities.
-
And advance Christofascism.
-
-
-
I’d probably be so honored I wouldn’t press charges anyways.
-
Anything can be defined to suit their needs.
-
isn't that the definition of, I don't know, a king?
-
-
The president can also now legally dissolve the Supreme Court and instate a new supreme Court who can then make the decision if it was an official act or not.
-
wash; rinse; repeat
-
-
This election will be the final free and fair one. God help us all
-
-
To do a "well, actually" I guess we didn't really have an empire until well past the country's founding. We were a mostly irrelevant backwater for some period of time.
ETA: And as someone who freaking loves this country, I realize that saying a comment like the above is one that could probably get you into a fight two days from now, most especially, when all kinds of fetishistic performative military nonsense and uncritical screeds about this country are at peak ridiculousness (and I love July 4th in spite of these flaws). I consider myself a real patriot, but one that is unwilling to whitewash this country.
-
-
-
Legal schmegal. A bullet has no politics
-
The pres can now assassinate a billionaire and take all their wealth for themselves as an official act, and be immune.
-
Biden needs to commit to overturning this, and ideally Citizen's United, if he is re elected
-
Screw that, he's elected now. Just do it.
-
-
Just do an official act on the 6 servative SCOTUS judges.
-
-
Couldn't Biden write an executive order that describes what is "official" vs "unofficial"?
-
I mean, I wouldn't mind the current President exercising this power over their political rivals, in the election, the House, the Senate, the Supreme Court, purely as a defensive measure to protect America. It sets a shitty precedence, but do we really want He Who Shall Not Be Named to set the precedence first?
-
"It sets a shitty precedence.." is a gross minimalization to attach to effectively making the US be a dictatorship. And saying you're ok with a dictatorship because you happen to agree with the dictator is the kind of sentiment that cannot be left unchallenged/unexamined
-
Right?
And it's incredibly short sighted.
So, in 4 years, will the next dictator be just as "good"? What about the next?
Also the whole "To save America" is literally the exact same reasoning used, and even believed, by the other side. It's circular at this point, one is better, but the other thinks THEY need to save America just as much.
It's a real fucked situation.
-
-
-
All this murder crap is lame; why has nobody been parroting how the president can do other crimes, like tax fraud or lie under oath or buying drugs or literally anything but murder?
-
The President can fire employees that refuse to have sex with him. Firing executive branch employees is well within the President's power. If they don't submit to him, he can fire them. Official act.
-
Because the point is to scare you. "Breaking news president buys crack" is not as scary as "Breaking news president axe murders cabinet."
The ruling is not good, but it's not Seal Team Six executes its political rival bad. It's more likely to be President sells nuke secrets to Saudi Arabia under the new official "I Get to Sell Nuclear Secrets to Saudi Arabia Act" he just made up right now.
-
literal killing if human beings is lame? we already know to white collar criminals are doing tax fraud and use drugs. old news.
-
No, the murder isn't crap.
Biden can now murder the billionaires. Never mind the small fries.
-
-
Bye, Rachel Maddow.
-
-
The US has already extrajudicialy murdered a US citizen on purpose. The US under Obama sent a drone to murder a citizen without a trial.
Precedent was publicly set then.
The US 3 letter agencies have been doing this in secret for their entire time in power. But those are widely considered outside the law but necessary. Whatever that means.
-
Agree but I feel like pointing that out is implying this somehow doesn't make things worse which I feel like is missing the point. This removes the implicit threat of prosecution for anything the president does.
Now no matter how much political will exists for the prosecution, the president is fully and unequivocally immune.
-
-
any post saying that The President can assassinate anyone or any party opponent is nonsense. They won't do it themselves and if they order it, considering it's illegal the military won't carry it out. We have safeguards in place. The left needs to simmer down.
-
You're an idiot. President can authorize "lethal action". Thus, the latest SCOTUS ruling allows the President to kill people that they give official orders.
-
-
More fear mongering
-
Like now? The president has always been able to assassinate you, officially, the difference is that before he would have gone to jail and now he won't.
-
That’s kind of the point
-
Yes well, I was trying to be a little sarcastic with the headline, but looking at people's votes I think I have failed miserably.
-
-
-
This is a lie.
I really don't understand how people are twisting this so dramatically. The president is still bound by the law of the constitution. No president can just go on a killing spree. They still need to operate in an official capacity as POTUS. I mean, I understand we don't want to give Trump a win under any circumstances but he most certainly can still be held accountable for his actions.
presidents are entitled to “absolute immunity” from criminal prosecution for official acts,
This is simply not true. There are three levels of actions: core actions defined by the constitution, other official actions as president, and acts outside of being president. It's the first "core" actions that are immune simply because they are defined in the constitution - pardons, appointments, etc. It's like saying putting on your turn signal to make a turn is immune from prosecution. Other actions as president are presumed to be immune but that does not mean they are "absolutely" immune from prosecution.
Presidents are now entitled to “absolute” immunity, which means that no matter what they do, the immunity cannot be lost. They are always and forever immune, no matter what evidence is brought to bear. There is no crime that pierces the veil of absolute immunity.
This is 100% NOT TRUE.
-
When he uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to as- sassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in ex- change for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune.
Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor
-
For eight years we've been told we're overreacting as we predict all this stuff like Trump stuffing the courts with conservative activists, overturning Roe, killing chevron deference, and generally legislating from the bench. Poorly written law can be interpreted however they like. True or not, the SCOTUS majority has proven that they don't care what's written in the constitution, law books, etc. Whether or not you think the law can be interpreted a certain way, they are now set up to do whatever they like because even though they don't make the laws, they actually, implicitly do.
-
Hey, many actual members of the bar have said it is now legal (in that he is immune from prosecution) for Joe Biden to order the military to kill Donald Trump. You'll forgive me if I trust their analysis over that of oxjox@lemmy.ml.
-
I'd like to know what has changed. My assumption is that it has always been legal given it was done for reasonable reasons (national security, etc). Are they claiming that now the president can kill anyone they wish with no reason whatsoever? Has this wholly removed the fourth section of Article II?
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
-
-
-
You would think that somebody that called themselves a journalist would actually have journalistic integrity. Nothing the 'journalist' claimed was in the SCOTUS ruling. SCOTUS ruled that the president has immunity for many of his presidential actions and none for personal actions such as going on a murder streak
-
Under this ruling the president has absolute immunity for their use of any powers granted by the constitution, and that includes use of the military, pardon powers, and appointing and firing of executive department officials. Their motivations and purposes for use of those powers cannot be questioned by the courts or by any laws passed by congress.
The whole "official" vs "non official" acts things only comes into play for powers not explicitly granted by the constitution. And even then the president gets presumptive immunity.
Go read the actual ruling and the dissents and stop spreading misinformation. The journalist and the headline are accurate.
-
Quoting from Sotomayer's dissent (pp 29-30, paragraphing my own):
This new official-acts immunity now “lies about like a loaded weapon” for any President that wishes to place his own interests, his own political survival, or his own financial gain, above the interests of the Nation. Kore- matsu v. United States, 323 U. S. 214, 246 (1944) (Jackson, J., dissenting).
The President of the United States is the most powerful person in the country, and possibly the world.
When he uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution.
Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to as- sassinate a political rival? Immune.
Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune.
Takes a bribe in ex- change for a pardon?
Immune. Immune, immune, immune.
They go on with an incisive critique of the majority's reasoning:
Let the President violate the law, let him exploit the trap- pings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends. Because if he knew that he may one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be. That is the majority’s message today.
-
That's not true. Criminal acts are not protected, nor can they be made in an official capacity. Furthermore, the ruling says the court that determines official acts is the trails court. Not the supreme Court. Stop spreading misinformation.
-
-
SCOTUS ruled that the president has immunity for many of his presidential actions and none for personal actions such as going on a murder streak
Right, that's literally the point. All a malfeasant president would need to do is declare that assassinating political rivals is an official presidential action. If the president argues that it's an official act of their office and not of their own personhood, there's little room to hold them accountable for it.
It may seem like an absolutely ridiculous argument, and that's because it is. What constitutes an "official" presidential action was left intentionally un-defined by the court, so that such ridiculous arguments could be treated as legitimate if the immunity is challenged.
-
Perhaps Biden could firmly establish precedent for that...two birds, etc.
-
I would take this at face value except for the fact that the president is the commander in chief of the largest, best equipped, most lethal, official killing organization in the planet.
Killing is, and has always been, a possible official act.
-
Why should we listen to you and not Sotomayor?
-
The only remedy the current court's ruling really allows is impeachment. It essentially means that (absent a later ruling specifying exactly what counts as a President's "official acts,") the President can do literally anything he wants and never suffer any consequences. Don't agree that what he was doing was an official act? Impeach him or stfu. He's not going to jail for breaking any law, ever.
-
-
As President my FIRST OFFICIAL ACT is to get a 3 Kill Streak UAV!
-
The article starts with ‘welp.’
-
136 comments
Sadly no. The way they turned it around was very clever.
So they said that only official presidential business is immune, but were ambiguous what that actually means, so inevitably they made it so it would go through them to determine what is the official business.
Second thing is that they picked up from their ass that Constitution also says that no official business can be used in any trial, even if it is unrelated. This not only jeopardizes all the indictments he had, it possibly will negate the New York trial.
trump already submitted request to have it referred based on this SCOTUS ruling.
This election might be the last free election we have. And even if trump loses it will still not be over.
Please vote and make your friends and family vote. And not just for president but also for the Congress.
Edit: I also recommend everyone a book "On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons From the Twentieth Century" (there's also reading on YouTube) all the warning signs are present. The more people are aware what it is at stake the higher chance that this can be stopped.
In case it makes a difference to someone, it's a pretty short book.
How does one prove whether or not something is official business if official business can't be used in any trial?
The “unbiased” judge will define what is allowed in the trial or not. And the prosecutor can appeal that decision and hope the higher judge is not also bought and paid for by the criminal president.
For all intents and purposes does. Just SCOTUS made itself as a final check on what is an official act and what isn't.
So... he could assassinate Biden and all political opposition, but not Stormy Daniels
Trump could kill anyone and they would determine that it was official business. On the other hand, Biden could have the Republican judges executed and replaced with sycophants who could rule that this also was an official act. It’s a bad ruling.
Unless he signs an executive order. It doesn't get much more official than that.
So officially dissolve the Supreme Court and instate a new pack of judges and let those judges decide if it was an "Official Act" and thus totally legal.
I don’t think this immunity applies to states. So the NY trial was unrelated.
The NY trial was unrelated to his presidential business anyways. It was about private property and fraud relating therein.