Update
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

John Dean tells SCOTUS: See Nixon v. Fitzgerald

Nixon White House lawyer flags case that proves Trump has 'no criminal immunity'
David McAfee
April 25, 2024 8:18PM ET/Raw Story

Nixon v Fitzgerald (1982), which clearly states there is no criminal immunity for presidents."

The conservative Supreme Court wants to hand Donald Trump immunity, but it has to get around a past Nixon case to do so, former Richard Nixon White House counsel John Dean said on Thursday afternoon.

Dean, who has previously mused about the ex-president's legal issues, took to social media following a bombshell Supreme Court hearing that saw Trump's lawyer arguing that a president may be able to order the assassination of an opponent without being held liable criminally.

"Today’s SCOTUS argument on Trump’s criminal immunity revealed an activist conservative majority that wants to provide presidential immunity," Dean said. "To do so, they must get around Nixon v Fitzgerald (1982), which clearly states there is no criminal immunity for presidents."

Dean, who has previously mused about the ex-president's legal issues, took to social media following a bombshell Supreme Court hearing that saw Trump's lawyer arguing that a president may be able to order the assassination of an opponent without being held liable criminally.

"For example, as stated in Nixon v Fitzgerald, in Chief Justice Burger’s concurring ruling in the 5-4 decision creating civil immunity: '… there is no contention that the President is immune from criminal prosecution in the courts under the criminal laws enacted by Congress, or by the States, for that matter. Nor would such a claim be credible. The Constitution itself provides that impeachment shall not bar ‘Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.’ Art. I, § 3, cl. 7. Similarly, our cases indicate that immunity from damages actions carries no protection from criminal prosecution.'"

"Lawyers used to laugh when they heard Nixon’s analysis during Frost/Nixon: 'When the president does it, that means it’s not illegal.' Listening to the arguments before today’s Supreme Court, it appears the Republican Justices are all in with Richard Nixon," Dean said on social media on Thursday evening. "American democracy may be unraveling
Well, but check out this strong language from five conservative justices: [b][i]"an asserted right that is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution."[/i][/b]

Surely that will prevent them from manufacturing presidential immunity, right?? Oh, wait, that was when the five conservative justices were concurring with the Dobbs decision to end the right to abortion. Saving Trump's @SS is a completely different matter; manufacturing a new power is no problem there🤣😂
hunkalove · 61-69, M
Ya know, if the Supreme Court decides the president does have immunity Biden could have all of the conservative judges murdered, Trump too, and the world would be a better place!
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
hunkalove · 61-69, M
@LamontCranston If you think Biden is a good decent human being you don't know much about Biden. Not even the Shadow knows. But a thousand times better than Trump.
@hunkalove My comment was pointed sarcasm-but perhaps not pointed enough.
If you had said something like ten percent better than trump or "as bad as he is, the other guy poses more of a threat to constitutional order", I could see some room for discussion. But "a thousand times better"?
We virtually have government by decree and Stalinesque show trials now.
Burger Court dicta is really not that much of an obstacle to this Court, though, which seems determined to return the Country to an alternative past.

Having said that, I think people are reading way too much into questions from the Justices. They almost have to at least pretend to take Trump's batshit arguments seriously after taking the case, and now they can continue slow walking it and maybe not even risk giving Biden immunity.
Bumbles · 51-55, M
The Supreme Court seems poised to lose what shred of credibility they had left.

 
Post Comment