To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (1465884 ) 7/2/2024 7:25:53 PM From: Broken_Clock 1 RecommendationRecommended By
Respond to That was 1952-Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952),Power & Market • Tho Bishop Print this page a dissent opinion written by Justice Sonia Sotomayor. Never in the history of our Republic has a President had reason to believe that he would be immune from criminal prosecution if he used the trappings of his office to violate the criminal law. Moving forward, however, all former Presidents will be cloaked in such immunity. If the occupant of that office misuses official power for personal gain, the criminal law that the rest of us must abide will not provide a backstop.” Those who desire a society with equal protection under the law would likely agree that no president should be “above the law.” The problem, of course, is that what Sotomayor is describing is not a modern abomination foisted by an out-of-control, partisan court determined to protect a political patron. Instead, presidential immunity from misconduct has been the operating status quo in this country for decades. It is the current objection to its application here that it is driven by petty partisan animus, not an idealistic concern for the sacred nature of American democracy. As has been well documented at sites like Mises.org for quite some time , the executive branch’s tradition of criminal behavior has become ingrained in the office itself. Modern obvious examples include unilateral declaring war without the authorization of Congress, often with the deliberate use of bad intelligence . It includes ordering the death of American citizens abroad under the guise of these military adventures. President Biden has ignored concerns from the Supreme Court itself regarding action on student loans. reassesses the presidency further, one could find numerous other examples, such as Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s secretive use of the loan-lease program to actively subsidize the Soviet Union before American involvement in World War II. Or the general erosion of the Bill of Rights by the gradual expansion of federal power dating back well over a century.for a few hundred thousand dollars . Once again, the regime’s critics of Donald Trump ring entirely hollow because his own actions, at their most condemnable, are all behaviors that they themselves have been comfortable enabling for those they consider their own.
