How far fetched would a Class action lawsuit against Donald Trump be?

@MistyCee If that is true that is very troubling and makes the POTUS effectively an elected monarch like the Holy Roman Emperor and above the law.

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow The whole qualified immunity thing is up for debate in terms of its wisdom, but it is the law and while I haven't seen much on Presidential immunity in terms of policy decisions, I'd be surprised if it wasnt applied to something like this.

It is troubling, but there are solid public policy reasons behind it.

Think about it. Who'd take the job if he was personally liable for his policy driven actions?

Frankly, I tend to think the better course for compensating victims would be some sort of Congressional action, or at least a law expressly allowing the US to be sued.

I doubt there are many folks on here who dislike Trump more than I do, but the fact is, he was elected and while, IMO, that shouldn't make him immune from everything, it should preclude personal liability for actions within the course and scope of his job duties based on policy.

@MistyCee Making the POTUS above the law makes the rule of law functionally irrelevant and puts the country about 500 centuries behind the times. What possible public policy would justify an absolute monarchy with a revolving dynasty? Claiming elections means something doesn't work because as I mentioned the Holy Roman Empire had elections for the Emperor.


And allowing the US to be sued would make the public purse including their own taxes on the hook. Might as well mug them and give them their money back as "compensation."


Sorry but that would make him less accountable then the bloody Queen of England. What was the point of a revolution at that point?

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow I hear you, but as it stands, not just POTUS, but every government official on the federal level and as far as I know, on the state level as well, has qualified immunity from personal liability, and while there's plenty of room to debate what should and shouldn't be part of it, which is being discussed with respect to police officers, for example, getting rid of it entirely seems as crazy, if not crazier than making it absolute.

You brought up Covid, and I think that this one is, frankly too big and too much of a public policy thing to ask a court to do absent explicit action from Congress, which also bears some of the responsibility for Covid losses.

I'd much rather see suits based on actions clearly outside of legimate Presidential duties, e.g., emoluments, etc, but to mention tax evasion, and maybe Civil RICO suits predicated on federal crimes.

Just my opinion, of course.

@MistyCee I hear plenty of it would be crazy but not a single argument as to why having a government above the law is a good thing. In fact I would say this qualified immunity actually incentivizes abuse of power because there is zero accountability.


Again. An act through congress would just be sheltering criminals and paying them with their own tax money. It sounds like a comedy sketch.

What is the point if there is not consequences for dereliction of duty? You telling me everyone up the the chairman of the Joint Chiefs can be tossed in jail for dereliction of duty but the commander in chief is accountable to noone? The emoluments fiasco will go nowhere as the impeachment proved the senate values loyalty to the leader above the law and their oaths of office. Pence or Biden can just pardon him for all federal crimes at which point the NY DA might be able to go after him for small stuff but the families of teh 260 000 he got killed will still end up shafted. If this is how the current form of US government works maybe it should burn to the ground and start over. Looks to me like the American experiment has failed.

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow Honor me, and break it down a bit for discussion purposes.

Is your problem with having a government above the law, or a President?

In terms of consequences, are we talking about criminal responsibility, or civil compensation, either to victims, or, theoretically to the US Treasury?

Trump may be wealthier then most Presidents, but he can't afford to pay for even a tiny fraction of Covid related damages, even if he didn't have creditors who would prime all of his alleged victims.

The Government is the only entity which could effectively compensate people, and Congress could do that, just as it could authorize effective stimuli.

I've no doubt that our Constitution and system of government were ill prepared for Trump as well as for Covid, but the burn it to the ground impulse without a plan for a better building, is nuts, imo.

It's also the same kind of thinking that got Trump elected: drain the swamp, get rid of the career politicians, professionals, scientists and bureaucrats, the legal systems and institutions that haven't worked, and... what? Trust we'll get a benign and competent sovereign?

I'm up for talking about reforms and possible solutions, but I really don't think letting the courts entertain class actions against former executives is a really good solution to much.

@MistyCee On your first point both. Because in practice both the POTUS and the government are above the law. That much is crystal clear. In the last 20 years I have seen a president authorize the government to torture people and carry out political assassinations, both of which are illegal under both domestic and foreign law in the US and the only result of that was the person who blew the whistle was locked up.

Now you have a president who has gotten a quarter of a million citizens killed through gross negligence and as a result of his own direct intervention. And I looked into qualified immunity and it only applies to duties carried out responsibly. That doesn't include gross negligence and dereliction of duties.


With the current state of the law what you already have is an effective sovereign. It is time to stop pretending otherwise.

The US has toppled entire regions of the globe nevermind single nations for less.


Again I see no compelling argument to shelter criminals from responsibility because they hold public office. In fact that completely renders democracy irrelevant if the government is not accountable to the people or the law.

I think Americans need to stop looking at their constitution as divinely inspired and realize the current system is completely broken. This is way beyond bandaids.

@MistyCee One thing we do agree on. One fake billionaire can't cover the damage done.

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow I actually think we probably agree on a lot more than just that, really.

Back to your point, though, I don't really think federal judges ruling on class actions for damages are the way to fix things this big, although the courts certainly have a role to play.

In some ways, i'd like to see some major constitutional changes, but short of that, I'd go for smaller legislative changes aimed at taking back the legislative power that's been taken by the executive branch.

Biden may not be perfect, but he's less likely to wreck things to preserve executive power than Trump or even Obama, and with some smaller miracles, there might be a chance of small stuff, like 25th amendment implementation, reforming sovereign immunity, legislative oversight, interim appointments,special counsel stuff, etc.

I'm not optimistic about big changes, but there's a small chance for some smaller ones, not to mention the spectre of a bipartisan Congressional drive to fix things, which might be a lot more effective without Trump's interests weighing in against getting things done.

McConnell will likely have a huge role to play, and while I'm no fan, putting in Biden instead of Trump may help.

The first step, I think will have to be stimulus for the economy and of course, public health, and both of those things will be easier to work on without Trump trying to wet his beak.