It is pathetic.
A Home Democrat who apparently had not learn the Supreme Courtroom’s ruling on presidential immunity mentioned he would file a constitutional modification to overturn the excessive courtroom’s determination.
The Supreme Courtroom dominated 6-3 on Monday that Trump has blanket immunity for his core constitutional powers.
Former presidents are entitled to at the least a presumption of immunity for his or her official acts.
The Supreme Courtroom has dominated that there isn’t any immunity for personal acts.
Earlier this yr the US Supreme Courtroom agreed to listen to Trump’s declare of presidential immunity in a January 6 case by particular counsel Jack Smith in Washington, DC.
Chief Justice Roberts delivered the Courtroom’s majority opinion.
“We conclude that beneath our constitutional framework of separation of powers, the character of presidential energy requires {that a} former president take pleasure in some extent of immunity from legal prosecution for official acts whereas in workplace. At the very least within the train of the President’s core constitutional powers, this immunity should be absolute. For his remaining official features, he’s entitled to immunity. At present stage of the proceedings on this case, nevertheless, we’d like not resolve whether or not that immunity should be absolute or whether or not a presumptive immunity will suffice as an alternative,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote.
Justice Roberts additionally chastised Choose Tanya Chutkan for not analyzing the conduct alleged in Jack Smith’s criticism.
“Regardless of the unprecedented nature of this case and the crucial constitutional questions it raises, decrease courts have rendered their choices on an especially expeditious foundation. As a result of these courts have expressly rejected any type of presidential immunity, they haven’t analyzed the conduct alleged within the impeachment to find out what ought to be categorised as official and what ought to be categorised as non-public. Neither get together has briefed this challenge earlier than us (though they’ve mentioned it at oral argument in response to questions). And just like the implied immunity query, this categorization raises a collection of unprecedented and vital questions in regards to the president’s powers and the boundaries of his authority beneath the Structure,” Roberts wrote.
The Supreme Courtroom has nowhere mentioned {that a} President is above the regulation.
The Supreme Courtroom ruling will ship Jack Smith’s DC case again to Choose Tanya Chutkan
Congressman Joe Morelle (D-NY) embarrassed himself by claiming he would introduce a constitutional modification to overturn the Supreme Courtroom ruling.
“I’ll introduce a constitutional modification to reverse the damaging SCOTUS determination and make sure that no president is above the regulation. This modification will do what SCOTUS has did not do—put our democracy first,” Democrat Rep. Joe Morelle mentioned at X.
I’ll carry a constitutional modification to reverse SCOTUS’s damaging determination and make sure that no president is above the regulation. This modification will do what SCOTUS has did not do—put our democracy first.
— Joe Morelle (@RepJoeMorelle) July 1, 2024
