• BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    9 months ago

    It’s absolutely ludicrous to think that a president should be immune legally for everything they do as a President.

    Honestly, at that point Joe should just pull a gun and shoot him during a debate… Immunity, right?

    That’s not how any of this should work. The courts better figure this shit out properly, or the nation is done for.

  • ZephrC@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    If Trump won, it would mean Joe Biden could declare himself president for life, since his presidential immunity would protect him from any consequences of ignoring elections.

    • Archpawn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      It would mean he couldn’t be punished for it. It wouldn’t mean his attempt at taking over the country would be successful. That said, we want to make it so there’s an actual punishment for that so presidents don’t just keep trying.

  • kirklennon@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    9 months ago

    It’s not outlandish enough to have his attorneys sanctioned for making a frivolous argument, but only because criminal defendants are allowed to grasp at straws. It’s a deeply unserious argument with no textual or historical support and isn’t going to pass muster among even the worst judges. It’s not even going to meaningfully delay his trial. It’s just fodder for his political supporters so he can pretend that he isn’t a criminal because apparently l’etat, c’est moi.

  • litchralee@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    I can’t answer the question directly, but this page (est 10 minutes read) puts into context how well that line of argument has been received in the courts so far: https://terikanefield.com/absoluteimmunity/

    While not impossible, it would certainly up-end a fair amount of constitutional jurisprudence to accept the idea that there might be someone above the law.