Washington Today (4-25-24): Supreme Court in Trump case signals some presidential criminal immunity

Рет қаралды 3,481

23 күн бұрын

The Supreme Court hears oral argument in Trump v. U.S., on whether Donald Trump has presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts while in office or if he can be prosecuted for allegedly trying to overturn his loss in the 2020 presidential election.
We will hear parts of the lawyers' exchanges with the Justices and talk about the case with Politico's senior legal affairs correspondent Josh Gerstein. (1)
President Joe Biden goes to Syracuse, New York to announce a multi-billion CHIPS & Science Act award for a new computer chip factory.
The Federal Communications Commission votes to reinstate net neutrality rules, which prohibits broadband providers from varying internet speeds based upon how much some sites pay.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu calls for a greater crackdown on pro-Palestinian protests on U.S. college campuses. We will hear from him and from the U.S. State Dept Deputy spokesperson Vedant Patel.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken is in China for talks about fair trade.
Kim Kardashian, reality TV star and criminal justice reform advocate, joins Vice President Kamala Harris at the White House as part of "Second Chance Month".
Download the FREE C-SPAN Now App. www.c-span.org/c-spanNow/
Discover the C-SPAN Video Library at www.c-span.org/quickguide/
Explore C-SPAN's Free Educational Resources at www.c-span.org/classroom/
C-SPAN: Created by Cable in 1979. Offered as a public service.
Support C-SPAN by Donating Today: donorbox.org/support-c-span?u...
Subscribe to our KZbin channel: / cspan
Follow us:
Facebook: / cspan
Twitter: / cspan
Instagram: / cspan
Subscribe:
C-SPAN Podcasts: www.c-span.org/podcasts/
Newsletters: www.c-span.org/connect/
Visit the C-SPAN Shop: c-spanshop.org/
#cspan

Пікірлер: 26

@Junkjet00 21 күн бұрын

Thank the french for showing the world what to do incase of emergency

@desigirlBea 21 күн бұрын

Recorded applause lol

@jannmutube 20 күн бұрын

---- < As President Lincoln said, "Governments do not write laws to be overthrown". Or, as has recently been said, "The Constitution was not written as a suicide pact".

@Elinore-by2zh 21 күн бұрын

S stands for SUPEREME FOR GOD SO LOVED THE WORLD THAT HE GAVE HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON... YOU CAN ONLY BE THE CHILDREN OF OUR HEAVENLY FATHER IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST...AMEN 🙏🏽

@jannmutube 21 күн бұрын

---- < It's not the purview of the court to write hypothetical scenarios. While the court allowed immunity from private civil suits for monetary damages by a member of the public, immunity from criminal prosecution would undo the Constitution, the rule of law, and legal precedent. The Executive is vested in the President (Article II, Section 1, clause 1), however, the power /functions of the President are vested in the law. 3 U.S.C. § 301(1) The power /functions of the president is VESTED IN THE LAW ... § 301(2) .... nothing relieves the President of his responsibility in office for the acts of those he appoints. Article II, Section 3 requires a President to "faithfully execute the law". No violation of statutory or criminal law is an Article II duty /official act immune from criminal prosecution. .There is no "outside perimeter" in which a President can commit crimes with impunity.

@jannmutube 20 күн бұрын

---- < It's not the purview of the Court to write rulings for hypothetical scenarios. ... to write rules over-stepping the separation of powers or international law.. ..... Executive privilege is not immunity from criminal prosecution. .... Even legislative immunity (while in the course of legislative activities) in the Speech and Debate clause does NOT include immunity from criminal prosecution for treason, felony, or disturbance of the peace. ..... Utilizing legitimate Article II duties is not a crime but a violation of procedural law, or the commission of a crime is never an Article II duty / official act. The violation of procedural law is subject to applicable criminal law. It is not akin to a private civil suit by a member of the public for monetary damages. .... President Obama was acting under the War Powers Act (passed after 9/11) which only expired in Trump's first year as President. Hopefully, the SCOTUS isn't gong to be goaded into writing some hypothetical immunity for a President to 'Do whatever the h*ll he wants" with the military. .... The Article I impeachment clause restricts not expands legislative power. "Afterward" is not a synonym for "Nevertheless". "Notwithstanding" is a synonym meaning, " in spite of any indications or expectations to the contrary"

@jannmutube 21 күн бұрын

---- < 1) The issue of a President being "immune within his own sphere" is refuted in U.S. v Nixon (1974) Page 418 U. S. 706. 2) "U.S. v Nixon 418 U.S. 683, page 418 U.S. 715, 716 balances the right to confidentiality with the 'fair administration of justice', to protect sensitive and top secret information"..... not to empower a President with king-like powers. . "Marshall's statement cannot be read to mean IN ANY SENSE that a President is above he law," .