A Pennsylvania state judge ruled Monday that an election worker cannot sue former President Trump over statements he made sowing doubt in the 2020 election results while in office, finding the stat…
Pennsylvania judge ruled that former President Trump is immune from a lawsuit filed by an election worker over Trump’s false claims of election fraud while in office. The judge said Trump’s comments sowing doubt about the 2020 election results were made while he was president and therefore covered by presidential immunity. However, the lawsuit also cites a letter Trump wrote after leaving office which is not covered by immunity. While the judge dismissed the claims regarding Trump’s statements made while president, other legal proceedings may still examine the appropriateness of those statements.
Fuck that. Presidential immunity is for the executive office of the united states to be able to bend some rules to act in the best interest of the people represented by the office. There is no way to describe undermining the constitution to subvert the best interests of the people represented by the office as being in their best interest.
Depending on the timeline, it isn’t unreasonable to expect an amended complaint based on allegations in the indictment that was released by Jack Smith yesterday.
Not surprising, actually. Courts don’t seem to want to resolve the question of “Presidential immunity”, even though it is not explicitly written into the Constitution (where other functions are). So now it has become “tradition”, until, that is, a judge grows a pair and works to clarify the situation.
Other legal proceedings may examine the propriety of his statements and actions while he was the President and whether, as the plaintiffs in this and other cases contend, it was this conduct which served as the actual threat to our democracy. But this case is not the proper place to do so. Here, Trump is entitled to Presidential immunity.
It sounds like he is handing off the presidential immunity decision to a higher court. Can somebody with a legal background say whether this kind of case can go to a higher court?
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !politics@beehaw.org
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it’s a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
🤦♂️
Fuck that. Presidential immunity is for the executive office of the united states to be able to bend some rules to act in the best interest of the people represented by the office. There is no way to describe undermining the constitution to subvert the best interests of the people represented by the office as being in their best interest.
That all read as, it’s just an opinion man.
So the president can just do whatever they want with no consequences at all?
For real what happened to nobody being above the law
Depending on the timeline, it isn’t unreasonable to expect an amended complaint based on allegations in the indictment that was released by Jack Smith yesterday.
Not surprising, actually. Courts don’t seem to want to resolve the question of “Presidential immunity”, even though it is not explicitly written into the Constitution (where other functions are). So now it has become “tradition”, until, that is, a judge grows a pair and works to clarify the situation.
It sounds like he is handing off the presidential immunity decision to a higher court. Can somebody with a legal background say whether this kind of case can go to a higher court?