According to a professor of law, leaders can now have political rivals killed.
According to a Harvard University law professor, the recent Supreme Court ruling that leaders are entitled to “absolute immunity from legal prosecution for activities within his convincing and preclusive legal authority” is a “prescription for autocracy.”
President Donald Trump claimed that he was unaffected by the trial for his 2021 efforts to obstruct the Electoral College votes. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, said leaders do had immunity for political functions.
The majority of the time questioned whether the President had any immunity from prosecution for his illegal actions. The President is not a man of the rules. However, under our system of isolated power, the President is entitled to at least presumed immunity from prosecution for his formal functions, and he is not held accountable for exercising his fundamental constitutional rights.
Professor Laurence Tribe criticized the Supreme Court’s “incoherent” judgement.
The legislation will no longer function as a source of inhibition, Professor Tribe said on Monday,” What makes it truly unsafe is that even if we finally get over Trumpism and the MAGA action, we will have to rely on the good persona of future leaders.”
” That’s unsafe, that’s a prescribing for monarchy, and later for dictatorship and dictatorship”, Tribe said on MSNBC.
Michael Waldman, chairman of New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice, expressed similar problem. He is also a past assistant to President Bill Clinton, serving as his ghostwriter.
The Supreme Court, “issued an training manual for malfeasance leaders”, Waldman wrote on X.
There are causes to get anxious about prosecuting previous presidents. So some requirements make feel”, he wrote. ” Here, though, the Court has issued an instruction manual for lawbreaking presidents. Make sure you only conspire with different government workers. You’ll not be held to account”.
THREAD: I thought the” stall” – the delay – would be the worst thing the Supreme Court did on Trump’s immunity. How stupid I was.
— Michael Waldman ( @mawaldman ) July 1, 2024
Emily Hasday, a law professor at the University of Minnesota, claimed that the ruling makes it possible for leaders to have their political rivals killed, as Justice Sonia Sotomayor had in her dissention.
” It’s easy to think of dream settings, and Sotomayor does. For example, let’s say the president commands the military to kill a political rival, Hasday told Minnesota Public Radio.
” Well, is n’t directing military operations within the president’s exclusive authority? So would n’t he have absolute immunity, especially because the court tells us elsewhere that motive does n’t matter in evaluating immunity claims”, Hasday said.
” But, it seems like this view establishes complete immunity for democratic assassinations”.
MORE: Red- express universities motionless on Title IX prevent
IMAGE: MSNBC
Follow The College Fix on Twitter and Like us on Instagram.
