# DC Court of Appeals rules against Trump Immunity, SCOTUS Makes a Different Decision **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Tags:** trump\ **Created:** [February 6, 2024, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188 "2024-02-06T15:22:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![bobot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bobot/32/21622_2.png) [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2024, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/221 "2024-02-10T18:04:21Z")
Seems like all this court does after gutting abortion rights is deal with Trump cases. One after the other. Is America great again, or what? ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2024, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/222 "2024-02-10T19:02:58Z")
> [@bobot](#): > > Seems like all this court does after gutting abortion rights is deal with Trump cases That’s more a case of those are the ones anyone in the mediasphere cares about (and in the case of the candidate need to be taken care of kind of in a hurry or not at all before the election). When they make a decision on water rights or tribal sovereignty or interstate utility regs or stay an execution of an unknown immate, it winds up halfway down page 4. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2024, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/223 "2024-02-10T20:50:32Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > That’s more a case of those are the ones anyone in the mediasphere cares about (and in the case of the candidate need to be taken care of kind of in a hurry or not at all before the election). When they make a decision on water rights or tribal sovereignty or interstate utility regs or stay an execution of an unknown immate, it winds up halfway down page 4. Yep. I read (and if I wasn’t lazy, I’d search for a source) that the average person would likely be surprised by the percentage of SCOTUS decisions that are 9-0 or 8-1. We only hear about the high-impact, controversial stuff. ---
**Author:** ![CoolHandCox](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/coolhandcox/32/16233_2.png) [@CoolHandCox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CoolHandCox)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2024, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/224 "2024-02-12T22:40:46Z")
Trump timely filed his Mtn for Stay in the Supreme Court today. Here’s [an article about it](https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/12/trump-asks-supreme-court-to-delay-immunity-ruling-in-election-case.html). Here’s the [Motion for Stay](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24424104-supreme-court-stay). I _think_ we’ll get a response within two weeks whether they grant or deny it. If they grant, I don’t think that’s telling on what they will actually do on the merits. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2024, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/225 "2024-02-12T22:43:09Z")
> “Without immunity from criminal prosecution, the Presidency as we know it will cease to exist,” Trump’s attorneys wrote in an application for the Supreme Court to pause the ruling from a lower court. I’m no fancy Trump lawyer, but I think that’s overstating their argument a bit. And not in an effective way. ---
**Author:** ![rocking\_chair](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rocking_chair/32/2918_2.png) [@rocking\_chair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rocking_chair)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2024, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/226 "2024-02-12T22:54:57Z")
Hhhhm, a yogi berra quote. Interesting first line. ---
**Author:** ![penultima\_thule](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/penultima_thule/32/3833_2.png) [@penultima\_thule](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/penultima_thule)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2024, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/227 "2024-02-12T23:00:34Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > “Without immunity from criminal prosecution, the Presidency as we know it will cease to exist,” Well, to be sure, for the President they have as a client, it’s an existential threat. ---
**Author:** ![CoolHandCox](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/coolhandcox/32/16233_2.png) [@CoolHandCox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CoolHandCox)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2024, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/228 "2024-02-12T23:00:47Z")
Seriously. Or it _should_ cease to exist. You answered a question upthread and I meant to ask you about it, but forgot. Basically, why can’t the President be charged if say he orders a strike that kills a bad actor foreigner on foreign soil? You said, to the effect of, because he didn’t commit a crime. If that’s wrong, let me know. Why did the President not commit the federal crime of murder? (_I intuitively know he did not, but why_) I’m curious how it would play out. I don’t think you can stop the DOJ from charging it - if you can, maybe that’s the end of it. If not, after being charged, would the President just claim immunity (rightfully in this scenario) and the case would be immediately dismissed? Did the President not fulfill all the elements of the crime (he intended to kill that person and he did); or is it a jurisdictional thing? Or something obvious I’m missing altogether. I’m asking this very straight up out of curiosity how this would legally play out. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2024, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/229 "2024-02-12T23:09:43Z")
> [@CoolHandCox](#): > > why can’t the President be charged if say he orders a strike that kills a bad actor foreigner on foreign soil? For the same reason the person flying the plane or piloting the drone is not liable for murder (or anyone else attempting to kill an enemy in military operation carried out by the US military). If it is a legitimate military action under the UCMJ they are not committing murder (and if not the order to carry it out is an illegal order that they are duty bound to not carry out or they can face charges). You can argue its just a moral bandaid to justify committing murder, but thats what the law says (and its how the law has worked for a long time, its just the ability for a POTUS to say “I want to blow up that specific guy” on the other side of the world that has changed). ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2024, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/230 "2024-02-12T23:52:00Z")
Right. Not every deliberate killing of a human configures the **legal** offense of “murder” before a court. But that is really playing along with Trump’s defense. The whole point is that he engaged in numerous actions that were NOT within the lawful scope of his office and he is defending them under a theory that w/o unlimited general immunity then no president would dare do or say anything lest his successor immediately upon taking office have him arrested. The notion of perhaps getting together a solid cover/excuse before doing or saying blatantly illegal, immoral or hateful things, rather than just shamelessly and even aggressively doing so in front of the world and daring anyone to come after you, does not seem to cross their minds. ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2024, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/231 "2024-02-13T17:37:53Z")
Moving right along! SCt gives Smith until 1/20 to respond to Trump’s petition. I expect him to file considerably before the deadline. > **[Supreme Court sets Feb. 20 deadline for special counsel response in Trump...](https://abcnews.go.com/US/supreme-court-sets-feb-20-deadline-special-counsel/story?id=107194092)** > > The Supreme Court has set a Feb. 20 deadline for the special counsel to respond to Donald Trump's request for a stay of an appeals court rejection of his immunity claim. ---
**Author:** ![hajario](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hajario/32/171_2.png) [@hajario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hajario)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2024, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/232 "2024-02-13T17:40:03Z")
> [@Dinsdale](#): > > Moving right along! SCt gives Smith until 1/20 to respond to Trump’s petition. I expect him to file considerably before the deadline. Until **2/20**. ---
**Author:** ![Atamasama](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atamasama/32/12961_2.png) [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2024, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/233 "2024-02-13T19:13:16Z")
Legal Eagle just dropped a video on this. [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/747zo5TjmN8/maxresdefault.jpg "Trump is Not Immune from Prosecution, For Now.") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=747zo5TjmN8) The first thing I found interesting is that Devin pointed out that the framers of the US Constitution wanted to ensure that Congress was not impeded in their duties by giving them fairly broad immunity from arrest, and granted them certain immunities. James Madison suggested discussing giving similar immunities to the POTUS, but they declined to consider it, so it wasn’t included. The doctrine of giving the POTUS an immunity to most civil charges while in the course of their duties was established later. That should be of interest to any originalists in the SCOTUS if they take up this case. ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2024, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/234 "2024-02-13T21:25:03Z")
> [@hajario](#): > > Until **2/20**. Thanks ---
**Author:** ![DWMarch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dwmarch/32/1010_2.png) [@DWMarch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DWMarch)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2024, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/235 "2024-02-14T03:58:36Z")
I vaguely recall that back in the Clinton days there was a plan to smoke a certain Osama Bin Laden using a missile but Clinton checked with a lawyer and was told it would be a bad idea. Of course, since 9/11 the question of whether or not POTUS can use missiles etc. to kill wanted terrorists (even ones who are American citizens) has been decisively settled. But there was a brief, shining moment when the President of the United States of America backed down from killing the most wanted terrorist in the world because a lawyer said no. The lawyer did not say “well, you have absolute immunity so go ahead and fire whatever missiles you want, it’ll be fine.” ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2024, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/236 "2024-02-14T15:00:47Z")
> [@DWMarch](#): > > I vaguely recall that back in the Clinton days there was a plan to smoke a certain Osama Bin Laden using a missile but Clinton checked with a lawyer and was told it would be a bad idea. Do you have a cite for this? I always thought that the reason not to attack was not due to legal liability but due to civilian casualty concerns. And the recommendation against was from the military staff, not lawyers. Here is my cite: [Bill Clinton: "I could have killed" Osama bin Laden - CBS News](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bill-clinton-i-could-have-killed-osama-bin-laden/) ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2024, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/237 "2024-02-15T02:59:49Z")
> [@Dinsdale](#): > > SCt gives Smith until 1/20 to respond to Trump’s petition. I expect him to file considerably before the deadline. Indeed, he responded tonight: [https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/14/politics/special-counsel-supreme-court-trump-response/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/14/politics/special-counsel-supreme-court-trump-response/index.html) ---
**Author:** ![Spoons](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spoons/32/3141_2.png) [@Spoons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoons)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2024, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/238 "2024-02-28T22:14:53Z")
It looks like the Supreme Court will hear the immunity matter: [https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/28/politics/trump-supreme-court-immunity/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/28/politics/trump-supreme-court-immunity/index.html) The story just broke, and details are still coming in, but it looks like it will cause a delay. Rather than things getting going in March, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments the week of April 22. Of course, the parties, and any _amici curiae_, will need to draft and file briefs before then. In short, yep, Donnie got himself another delay. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2024, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/239 "2024-02-28T22:20:17Z")
> [@Spoons](#): > > In short, yep, Donnie got himself another delay. Well that sucks. Turns out appointing 33% of the SCOTUS is a pretty good way of getting away with treason. ---
**Author:** ![Atamasama](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atamasama/32/12961_2.png) [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2024, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/240 "2024-02-28T23:54:06Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > Turns out appointing 33% of the SCOTUS is a pretty good way of getting away with treason. Insurrection and espionage, not treason. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188.md?page=13)