Sorry if this is not the proper community for this question. Please let me know if I should post this question elsewhere.

So like, I’m not trying to be hyperbolic or jump on some conspiracy theory crap, but this seems like very troubling news to me. My entire life, I’ve been under the impression that no one is technically/officially above the law in the US, especially the president. I thought that was a hard consensus among Americans regardless of party. Now, SCOTUS just made the POTUS immune to criminal liability.

The president can personally violate any law without legal consequences. They also already have the ability to pardon anyone else for federal violations. The POTUS can literally threaten anyone now. They can assassinate anyone. They can order anyone to assassinate anyone, then pardon them. It may even grant complete immunity from state laws because if anyone tries to hold the POTUS accountable, then they can be assassinated too. This is some Putin-level dictator stuff.

I feel like this is unbelievable and acknowledge that I may be wayyy off. Am I misunderstanding something?? Do I need to calm down?

  • Akuden@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 days ago

    Says right in the ruling it’s up to the trails court to determine what is official.

    • Snowclone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      The fact that Clarence Thomas has his name on this ruling really helps illustrate how easy and often cheap it is to simply buy rulings.

      • Akuden@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        4 days ago

        I wonder, what do you think the ruling changed? What can the president do now that the president wasn’t able to do before?

        • Snowclone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Did you read the dissenting judges statements on the ruling? Sitting Supreme Court Justices have publicly given their opining on what the ruling means.

          Did you read it?