TLDR: there are no qualifying limitations on presidential immunity

Not only does any US president now have complete immunity from “official” actions(with zero qualifying restrictions or definitions), but if those actions are deemed “unofiicial”, no jury is legally allowed to witness the evidence in any way since that would interfere with the now infinitely broad “official” presidential prerogatives.

Furthermore, if an unofficial atrocity is decided on during an official act, like the president during the daily presidential briefing ordering the army to execute the US transexual population, the subsequent ordered executions will be considered legally official presidential acts since the recorded decision occurred during a presidential duty.

There are probably other horrors I haven’t considered yet.

Then again, absolute immunity is absolute immunity, so I don’t know how much threat recognition matters here.

If the US president can order an action, that action can be legally and officially carried out.

Not constitutionally, since the Constitution specifically holds any elected politician subject to the law, but legally and officially according to the supreme court, who has assumed higher power then the US Constitution to unconstitutionally allege that the US President is absolutely immune from all legal restrictions and consequences.

    • uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      3 days ago

      What is more interesting to me is he could have persons of interest detained and disappeared as per the still-active surveillance, national security and anti-terror states from the aughts and 2010s.

      I would avoid doing anything to Trump directly as the US wouldn’t want to martyr him but it would be delightfully ironic to detain the SCOTUS associate justices for sake of their own safety where they can stay at black sites within earshot of the screaming.

      In the meantime there are Heritage Society members and other thinktank analysts who have been caught on hot mic or text discussing policies that would drastically change the character of the United States, that are contrary to the spirit of the Constitution of the United States and parallel to the indictments in the Declaration of Independence.

      So it would be entirely justified to introduce them to the US secret detention system and possibly to the enhanced interrogators to remind them what kinds of presidential power they endorsed in eras past.

      I’m sure they plan to remind Trump of these resources when Trump wants to make someone sorry they were born.

      Right I’m having a hard time not embracing my inner Magneto when I imagine being in Biden’s shoes. After all, these guys made it very clear what they will do to me when they have half a chance.

    • Varyk@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Without legal consequence, yes.

      That action could not be legally scrutinized or judged and Biden, as president, would be immune from prosecution.

      Not even Putin is above the law according to any interpretation of the Russian constitution.

    • yeldarb12@r.nf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      3 days ago

      Yes. He can order the military (seal team 6 or something) to put a bullet in his face. That’s a presidential action. Whoever does it though could be charged. The president could then pardon (another presidential action) everyone involved.

      After Nixon resigned, he was pardoned before he was even charged so…

    • Guy_Fieris_Hair@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 days ago

      He shouldn’t kill him, that’s too devisive. Maybe strap him to the top of a rocket and send him to low earth orbit? And leave him there?