Is anyone else highly concerned with the SCOTUS ruling that the POTUS is immune from criminal liability?
Semjaza @ Semjaza @lemmynsfw.com Posts 1Comments 556Joined 2 yr. ago
Semjaza @ Semjaza @lemmynsfw.com
Posts
1
Comments
556
Joined
2 yr. ago
Doesn't the ruling say that if the president takes a bribe to give someone an official appointment, that the person was appointed is not admissable as evidence in court?
That's both new, and stupid. But what Roberts wrote in the majority ruling.
Edit: It also states that Trump putting pressure on Pence to change the election results may or may not be an official act, and whether it can be prosecuted is unclear (and whether it can be discussed in law needs an investigation and a ruling, rather than deciding it in a court of law).
Edit II: Romer below said it all far better than me. https://lemmy.autism.place/comment/224475