Democratic Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker is warning top lieutenants of President Donald Trump’s violent and unlawful immigration enforcement policies that they will not always have the protection of presidential immunity and that lawmakers in the future will seek to hold them to account for their behavi...
But he isn’t……and he can’t……
What did that scotus ruling mean then? I was under the impression that the president has immunity from prosecution for any acts taken as long as they’re done as part of the job, or whatever the wording was.
You just answered your own question, apart of his job (official acts). Throwing judges in jail, even if they deserve it, isn’t the president’s job. The judges would have to be properly investigated and prosecuted. Which if a judge is going down for corruption, might as well draw a target on Congress 😭.
Only was the president CAN throw them in jail by himself, is calling a national emergency and arresting judges off the bases they’re domestic terrorists. And he BETTER be able to prove it, or it’s curtains for him
I wish I had your faith that the corrupt SCOTUS won’t see literally any action as part of the president’s job. Or at least they won’t be discerning until a dem is back in office.
In retrospect. Hillary REALLY needed to win 2016. Trump got to appoint THREE justices in ONE term. Beyond lucky, that was the ball game. Without the 6-3 SCOTUS, trump most likely would’ve been in jail before the 2024 election, granted he probably wouldn’t have president either in this timeline and would’ve just kept being a corrupt celebrity.
But yeah, throwing Justices in jail isn’t an official act.