President Joe Biden warned Monday that a Supreme Court ruling granting presidents broad immunity from prosecutionwould make an unchecked Republican Donald Trump “more emboldened to do whatever he wants” if he regains the White House in November’s election.

Biden, under intense pressure after his disastrous debate performance against Trump last week, urged Americans to think carefully about their election decision and signaled he had no intention of dropping out of the race.

Criticizing the decision by the court’s conservative majority — which all but guarantees Trump will not face trial in Washington ahead of the November election over his actions during the violent riot on Jan. 6, 2021 — Biden said it now fell to the American people “to do what the courts should have been willing to do but will not.

“The American people have to render judgment about Donald Trump’s behavior.”

  • andrewta@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    6 months ago

    The seal team would call that an illegal order under the ucmj. Hidden couldn’t be prosecuted for giving the order, but the seal team would say no.

    • girlfreddy
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Biden could legally hire mercs to do the job and never once get called out on it.

    • AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Has the ruling not fully sunk in for you yet? He could legally find a way to do anything now. He could make it legal and override the ucmj. The hired guns (SEALs or mercs), in this hypothetical, would not say no. Especially not from the commander in chief with new dictator-level powers.

      • ryathal
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        He can’t be imprisoned for it. That doesn’t mean what he does is just allowed today any more than it was last week.

        • AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          So, what happens when he officially declares mar-a-lago a threat to national security and takes it out? Because before this ruling, he could’ve been imprisoned at the very least. But somehow it’s still the same now, even after this ruling? If that’s the case, then why did the Supreme Court even rule?

        • Cosmicomical@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Wtf are you on? It DOES mean exactly that. If laws now have no consequences, there are de facto no laws. How can anybody not see this?