Sources
Loading...
Additional media
Loading...
DeepNewz, mobile.
People-sourced. AI-powered. Unbiased News.
The recent Supreme Court decision in Trump v. U.S. has sparked significant controversy, particularly regarding presidential immunity and executive power. Critics argue that the ruling, which some claim places Presidents above the law, undermines fundamental principles of the nation. Jack Smith's motion, if granted, could allow him to present his case without a trial, raising concerns about violating the Supreme Court's immunity order and Chutkan’s original order. The decision's broader implications for presidential powers were highlighted in a Constitution Day speech by Jack Goldsmith, who emphasized its expansive discussion of exclusive presidential powers. The Senate Judiciary Committee, led by the Judiciary Democrats, is set to hold a hearing on Tuesday to examine the implications of this decision.
"[T]he decision’s main significance for the presidency lies in its expansive discussion of exclusive presidential powers, independent of the immunity ruling." @jacklgoldsmith in a Constitution Day speech on SCOTUS’s presidential immunity decision. https://t.co/96Sm9ZwToM
Just how radical was the Court's decision in Trump v. U.S.? Very. (And I'm not even referring to the "immunity from criminal prosecution" holding.) A post on how John Roberts' conception of "executive power" is even more alarming than ... John Yoo's. https://t.co/l5KMkMf4lO
“In other words, what Smith portrays as ‘a detailed, factbound, and thorough analysis’ of existing immunity questions—one the Supreme Court ordered in its remand of Chutkan’s original order denying all forms of presidential immunity in the J6 indictment—will instead act as the…
