Trump immunity: Expert explains Supreme Court decision

there goes the illusion that the law applies to everyone.

He sounded worried.. It's the first I have ever seen Neal like this.

What is the oath of office for? ...TO DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION. I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion

This is why your judicial should be fully independent from politics, unfortunately SC presidential nominations crosses that bridge.

The things corporate corruption will buy you.

the court needs to read the Constitution as written, not as they want it to be. It does not sperate from offical or unoffical actions.

Rome is falling.

Really? Starting a riot is an official act? UNBELIEVABLE!

Does anybody remember when Trump said he could just think it and it was an official act of the presidency and it seems like the Supreme Court just confirmed that the king makes all decisions final

GOP, the old saying goes or what the biased Supreme Court rules , "Be careful what you wish for"

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only person in the UK who has immunity from criminal law is the Monarch. Interesting parallel, at least to me... Good luck, USA.

How is campaigning an official act of the president?!

Can anyone explain this. If a president in office while election results are declared, refuses to accept the results, can he have power to do anything? If so why would any president in power give his office to coming president that results confirm? Every president can then continue ruling indefinitely untill he himself chooses to step aside. Just like kings

I think the US needs to rethink seriously how supreme court justices are elected and how long they can serve.

The fact that this is celebrated and not a cause for concern for all Americans is alarming and expected.

The majority decision looks partisan because it is local and partisan. It flies in the face of the intent of the Constitution.

Let me tell you how I see the Supreme Court’s ruling on Presidential Immunity published July 1, 2024. The ruling contains the seeds of disaster for the Government of the United States. Immunity for Official Acts of the President is considered absolute. Immunity for Official Acts was implicitly assumed in our government from the beginning. However, the wording of the finding does not limit the realm of Official Acts and includes actions which are presumptively Official. The wording does not permit the consideration of motive or intent. The wording, in present conservative interpretation, would allow directing the Attorney General to ignore or postpone a suit brought against the actions of the President or his Executive Staff. Recent history has shown us instances when a President of The United States attempted change the outcome of normal elections. Some of the actions were in direct contradiction of established democratic procedure. I will not Vote for Mr. Trump

To sum up: immunity for official acts only. There.

Why are the supreme court, justices that decide on matters of law. Appointed by politicians? They should be independent

The sword of justice has a double edge. And she wears a blingfold. The sad thing is that humans have a hard time with the blindfold. Pray for peace and wisdom for our leaders.