Connect with us

USA

Trump Has Absolute Immunity for Official Acts, US Supreme Court Rules

Published

on

The United States Supreme Court has for the first time recognised that former presidents have immunity from prosecution for certain actions taken in office, as it threw out a judicial decision rejecting Donald Trump’s bid to shield himself from criminal charges involving his efforts to undo his 2020 election loss.

The court on Monday ruled 6-3 that while former presidents enjoy immunity for actions they take within their constitutional authority, they do not for actions taken in a private capacity.

The ruling marked the first time since the nation’s 18th-century founding that the Supreme Court has declared that former presidents may be shielded from criminal charges in any instance.

The decision will boost Trump’s defence against federal charges over his efforts to overturn the 2020 vote, which he lost to President Joe Biden. It could also affect similar state-level election interference charges in Georgia.

Trump was quick to welcome the ruling. “BIG WIN FOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND DEMOCRACY. PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN,” the former president wrote in a social media post.

Chief Justice John Roberts announced the landmark decision on behalf of the court’s six-justice conservative majority. The court’s three liberal justices dissented.

The Supreme Court justices argued that enabling the prosecution of former presidents over their official acts in office could open the door for political retribution and despotism.

“The President enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official. The President is not above the law. But Congress may not criminalize the President’s conduct in carrying out the responsibilities of the Executive Branch under the Constitution,” they wrote.

They stressed that the immunity does not apply just to Trump but “to all occupants of the Oval Office, regardless of politics, policy, or party.”

Three of the six justices who backed the ruling were appointed by Trump himself.

Liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor forcefully rejected the majority’s opinion on Monday, arguing that the ruling effectively legalises abuse of power.

“The President of the United States is the most powerful person in the country, and possibly the world. When he uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution,” she wrote.

“Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune.”

Source: Aljazeera

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

USA

US Election: Kamala Harris Gets 82 Nobel Prize Winners’ Endorsement

Published

on

By

No fewer than 80 Nobel Prize winners have endorsed Kamala Harris for the presidency, warning that Donald Trump  would “jeopardize any advancements in our standards of living” given his earlier proposals for enormous cuts to science funding.

In an open letter, a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times, 82 Nobel prize winners from the US in the fields of physics, chemistry, economics and medicine, said “this is the most consequential presidential election in a long time, perhaps ever, for the future of science and the United States”.

The letter, which commends Harris for recognizing that “the enormous increases in living standards and life expectancies over the past two centuries are largely the result of advances in science and technology”, called Trump a potential threat to progress who could “jeopardize any advancements in our standards of living and impede our responses to climate change”.

The Nobel laureates range from a physicist involved in the discovery of remnant light from the Big Bang, to an immunologist instrumental in the development of a specific type of COVID-19 vaccine.

They includes signatories who won Nobels this month such as the molecular biologist Gary Ruvkun, the chemist David Baker, the physicist John Hopfield and the economist Daron Acemoglu.

Driven by concerns over the significant cuts to science funding proposed during Trump’s tenure, coupled with what he perceives as the former president’s adversarial stance toward science and academia, Joseph Stiglitz, an economist at Columbia University who won the Nobel memorial prize in economic sciences in 2001, said he was motivated by the “enormous cuts in science budgets” that Trump proposed during his presidency, as well as former president’s “anti-science” and “anti-university” stances.

“I hope it’s a wake-up call for people,” Stiglitz told the New York Times about the letter. “A consequence of this election is the really profound impact that his agenda has on science and technology.”

The letter also lauds Harris for her understanding of the invaluable contributions immigrants make to scientific progress on a national and global scale.

On Thursday, in a separate letter obtained by CNN, 23 living US recipients of the Nobel prize in economics, have expressed their endorsement of Harris’s economic agenda, deeming it “vastly superior” to the economic strategies proposed by Trump.

“While each of us has different views on the particulars of various economic policies, we believe that, overall, Harris’s economic agenda will improve our nation’s health, investment, sustainability, resilience, employment opportunities, and fairness and be vastly superior to the counterproductive economic agenda of Donald Trump,” they wrote.

Continue Reading

USA

Trump Rejects Another Kamala Harris’ Challenge to Debate on CNN

Published

on

By

Donald Trump, on Saturday, rejected another debate with Vice President Kamala Harris before the U.S presidential election, hours after the Democratic candidate’s campaign said she had agreed to an October 23 matchup with her Republican rival on CNN.

“Vice President Harris is ready for another opportunity to share a stage with Donald Trump, and she has accepted CNN’s invitation to a debate on October 23. Donald Trump should have no problem agreeing to this debate,” Jen O’Malley Dillon, the chair of the Harris campaign, said in a statement.

Trump stuck to his previous position that there would not be another debate before voters go to the polls in the November 5 election.

“The problem with another debate is that it’s just too late. Voting has already started,” the former U.S president told supporters at a rally in Wilmington, North Carolina.

Harris and Trump debated each other for the first time on September 10, in a contest that polls showed she won.

Trump debated President Joe Biden in June.

Biden’s shaky performance in that debate rattled Democrats and prompted strategists to ask whether their party should take the unprecedented step of replacing the 81-year old president as their candidate. Biden withdrew from the race for the White House in July.

Continue Reading

USA

Kamala Harris Chooses Tim Walz As Presidential Running Mate

Published

on

By

Vice President Kamala Harris has picked Minnesota Gov., Tim Walz, as her presidential running mate, ahead of the forthcoming American election in November.

He will join her this evening at a rally in Philadelphia, kicking off a swing through battleground states, says NBCnews.

Continue Reading

Trending