So, if Trump starts this after losing the election, just have Biden arrest him and provide him with a nice cosy cage in Cuba, and justify it as a national security issue.
So, if Trump starts this after losing the election, just have Biden arrest him and provide him with a nice cosy cage in Cuba, and justify it as a national security issue.
My understanding is that, unfortunately, that immunity is strictly about and for trump. I've been part of other discussions where that point has been made, and it was my understanding from the beginning.
I also recall (and correct me if my recollection is faulty) President Biden saying something like the holding in this case even applies to him; however he has the character to not do anything illegal and not need its protection.
I'd also like to point out that Justice Sotomayor's dissent which is quoted in the article. If she thought the holding was so narrow as to just apply to Mr. Trump, she would have used his name instead of writing about "the President of the United States".
So, if Trump starts this after losing the election, just have Biden arrest him and provide him with a nice cosy cage in Cuba, and justify it as a national security issue.
Everything a president does is legal according to the SCOTUS
My understanding is that, unfortunately, that immunity is strictly about and for trump. I've been part of other discussions where that point has been made, and it was my understanding from the beginning.
Please see: Supreme Court Grants Trump, Future Presidents a Blank Check to Break the Law, an ACLU "News & Commentary" article dated 7.3.2024.
https://www.aclu.org/news/civil-liberties/supreme-court-grants-trump-future-presidents-a-blank-check-to-break-the-law
I also recall (and correct me if my recollection is faulty) President Biden saying something like the holding in this case even applies to him; however he has the character to not do anything illegal and not need its protection.
I'd also like to point out that Justice Sotomayor's dissent which is quoted in the article. If she thought the holding was so narrow as to just apply to Mr. Trump, she would have used his name instead of writing about "the President of the United States".
Jessica, thank you for setting me straight with good information. I appreciate it.
You're welcome, Susan.
Don’t know how you got that conclusion.
John, see Jessica's answer above. I stand corrected.
I think from reading Joyce Vance's Substack and from discussions I've been in there. At this point I don't remember the details.