Are you prepared to have every Democrat former president who's still alive locked up? I can think of things that a malicious prosecutor could absolutely throw both Obama and Clinton in jail for, and I'm sure they could dig something up for Jimmy Carter.
Are you prepared to have every president from now on charged by partisan prosecutors and locked up after their term is up?
Do you think that if that happens it's going to result in a stable democratic society?
Are you prepared to have every president from now on charged by partisan prosecutors and locked up after their term is up?
Do you think that if that happens it's going to result in a stable democratic society?
It was really embarrassing for her to say that, it suggests lack of knowledge of basic concepts in law.
Sovereign immunity is a long-standing concept of common law. It says that the state, and by contrast agents of the state working within their role as such, are immune from prosecution unless the state agrees to allow them to be prosecuted. The US allows itself to be sued through mechanisms such as the federal torts act, or through federal civil rights legislation such as 42 U.S. Code ยง 1983. This is a requirement of basic government rule because many actions of government would potentially open government up to unlimited legal action.
For example, Obama ordered an American citizen killed by drone strike, and that person died. Whether you agree with what he did or not, he isn't guilty of murder because he is the head of state.
As another example, prior to 42 usc 1983 being enacted, members of the KKK could become part of the government and use their office to violate civil rights and there was no recourse due to sovereign immunity. That was the reason the law was enacted in 1871 -- imagine that there was no recourse for over 90 years after the United States were created, and that was rectified by the passage of that important civil rights law.
The purpose of the Supreme Court is not to create new arbitrary law from the bench, it is to rule on laws and the Constitution. The correct thing to do here if there was political will to limit the absolute sovereign immunity conferred by the presidency, is for the democratically elected Congress to pass laws which explain exactly when and how the office of president limits his or her sovereign immunity. That is what a country governed by democracy and the rule of law would do, and it is how America worked for centuries until now.
Sovereign immunity is a long-standing concept of common law. It says that the state, and by contrast agents of the state working within their role as such, are immune from prosecution unless the state agrees to allow them to be prosecuted. The US allows itself to be sued through mechanisms such as the federal torts act, or through federal civil rights legislation such as 42 U.S. Code ยง 1983. This is a requirement of basic government rule because many actions of government would potentially open government up to unlimited legal action.
For example, Obama ordered an American citizen killed by drone strike, and that person died. Whether you agree with what he did or not, he isn't guilty of murder because he is the head of state.
As another example, prior to 42 usc 1983 being enacted, members of the KKK could become part of the government and use their office to violate civil rights and there was no recourse due to sovereign immunity. That was the reason the law was enacted in 1871 -- imagine that there was no recourse for over 90 years after the United States were created, and that was rectified by the passage of that important civil rights law.
The purpose of the Supreme Court is not to create new arbitrary law from the bench, it is to rule on laws and the Constitution. The correct thing to do here if there was political will to limit the absolute sovereign immunity conferred by the presidency, is for the democratically elected Congress to pass laws which explain exactly when and how the office of president limits his or her sovereign immunity. That is what a country governed by democracy and the rule of law would do, and it is how America worked for centuries until now.
- replies
- 0
- announces
- 0
- likes
- 0