This is sad.
A House Democrat who apparently didn’t read the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity says he will file a constitutional amendment to overturn the high court’s ruling.
The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on Monday that Trump has absolute immunity from his core constitutional powers.
Former presidents are at least entitled to immunity for their official actions.
The Supreme Court ruled that there was no immunity for unofficial acts.
Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear Trump’s claim of presidential immunity in a case heard by Special Counsel Jack Smith on January 6 in Washington, DC.
Chief Justice Roberts delivered the court’s majority opinion.
“We conclude that, under our constitutional structure of separation of powers, the nature of presidential power requires that former presidents enjoy a certain degree of immunity from criminal prosecution for official actions while in office. At least as far as the president’s exercise of core constitutional powers is concerned, This immunity must be absolute. He is also immune as to the remainder of his official duties. However, at this stage of the proceedings we do not need to and will not decide whether this immunity must be absolute or constructive. is sufficient,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote.
Judge Roberts also criticized Judge Tanya Chatkan for not analyzing the conduct alleged in Jack Smith’s indictment.
“Despite the unprecedented nature of the case and the very important constitutional issues it raised, the lower courts ruled with great speed. Because these courts flatly rejected any form of presidential immunity, they did not analyze the allegations in the indictment. actions to determine which actions should be classified as official and which as unofficial. Neither side briefed us on the issue (although they made oral arguments in response to questions). Problems remain the same, and this classification raises many significant and unprecedented questions about the power of the president and the limits of his power under the Constitution,” Roberts wrote.
Nowhere has the Supreme Court said that the president is above the law.
The Supreme Court’s ruling will send Jack Smith’s D.C. case back to Judge Tanya Chutkan.
Rep. Joe Morrell (D-N.Y.) embarrassed himself by claiming he would introduce a constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court’s ruling.
“I will propose a constitutional amendment to reverse the Supreme Court’s harmful decisions and ensure that no president is above the law. This amendment will accomplish what the Supreme Court failed to do – prioritize our democracy, ” Democratic Rep. Joe Morelle said on X.
I will propose a constitutional amendment to reverse the Supreme Court’s harmful decisions and ensure that no president is above the law. This amendment will accomplish what the Supreme Court failed to do—prioritize our democracy.
— Joe Morelle (@RepJoeMorelle) July 1, 2024
