# 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:** 18
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/341 "2024-07-02T02:58:17Z")
Didn’t the federal appeals court which ruled unanimously against Trump take that stance? The president is immune from some things and this ain’t that. He needs to stand trial. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/342 "2024-07-02T02:59:22Z")
I dunno, I can’t help but think that I and a lot of those panicking are missing or misinterpreting something here. I FULLY ACKNOWLEDGE that I could be wrong, or that I could be right but it doesn’t matter when Trump believes wrongly, but it just _feels_ like it isn’t what it looks like in the popular eye, even though I KNOW that Trump and conservatives have a history of doing the previously unthinkable. It’s just this weird strange background feeling. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/343 "2024-07-02T03:02:35Z")
Maybe Biden should do something so outrageous against Trump or the Republicans that it sparks enough bilateral support for a constitutional amendment to address and correct this situation. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/344 "2024-07-02T03:06:36Z")
“Bilateral”–hah! You’re funny. I mean, shit, man. Biden merely spoke out against the ruling, and Mike Johnson had the fucking _nerve_ to chastise him for attacking the judiciary. The chance of any bilateral action, as long as these jawdropping hypocrites are in power, is nil. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/345 "2024-07-02T03:07:02Z")
I agree. It doesn’t have to be world-shattering, necessarily. Just use eminent domain to turn Mar-a-Lago into a windmill farm. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/346 "2024-07-02T03:28:48Z")
I’d like to see Dark Brandon poke Trump with a stick with this ruling. 'So, the Supreme Court just said that the President could order Seal Team Six to assassinate a political opponent. Your lawyers said it too. Do you still agree with that? Because… I’m still the President, political opponent. 😁 ’ ---
**Author:** ![Win\_Place\_Show](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/win_place_show/32/13469_2.png) [@Win\_Place\_Show](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Win_Place_Show)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/347 "2024-07-02T03:36:32Z")
Similar to when SCOTUS overturned Roe vs Wade and it fired up the Democratic base and women to get out and vote in a handful of those “special elections”, hopefully this energizes enough of the right people to hit the polls (or mail in their ballots) in November. The greatest schadenfreude would be the tangerine ballbag dying in prison as an indirect result of this and the Roe ruling getting Democrats out to the polls. ---
**Author:** ![squeegee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/squeegee/32/14537_2.png) [@squeegee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squeegee)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/348 "2024-07-02T04:17:05Z")
> [@Odesio](#): > > That seems like good news for Biden. Looks like he can just do whatever he wants with Trump. Or surround Supreme Court members with guards that won’t let them travel. For their own protection. This cannot be questioned, it’s an official duty. Go for it, Joe. ---
**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:** [July 2, 2024, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/349 "2024-07-02T04:42:07Z")
> [@Johnny\_L.A](#): > > I’d like to see Dark Brandon poke Trump with a stick with this ruling. 'So, the Supreme Court just said that the President could order Seal Team Six to assassinate a political opponent. Your lawyers said it too. Do you still agree with that? Because… I’m still the President, political opponent. I was thinking that earlier today. If Trump can unleash Seal Team Six on Biden on Day One, then Biden can unleash Seal Team Six on Donald Trump _right now_. That seems to be the case, as per SCOTUS’ ruling. If so, then why does Biden not do it now? Shut Trump up, put him away, have a show trial, and let the chips fall where they may. I know that Biden has too many ethics to do that, but could he do that? ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/350 "2024-07-02T04:45:07Z")
> [@Spoons](#): > > I know that Biden has too many ethics to do that, but could he do that? No, because the SCOTUS has appointed itself the final arbiter of what constitutes an “official act.” I suspect there will be one standard for any Republican president and another for any Democratic one. ---
**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:** [July 2, 2024, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/351 "2024-07-02T04:49:48Z")
Thanks, @Aspenglow. That’s a bit of comfort. Not much, but a bit. I agree with the two standard remark. Cripes, this could mean the end of rule of law in the United States. ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/352 "2024-07-02T04:53:36Z")
> [@Spoons](#): > > Cripes, this could mean the end of rule of law in the United States. Not “could.” It _does_ mean that, I’m afraid. The only chance we have to stop it is for Dems to prevail in November – and they have to win big, because I think Republicans have a few more tricks up their sleeve to wrest the election away from Democrats in a close election. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/353 "2024-07-02T04:57:42Z")
Unfortunately, we know for a fact that open and violent rebellion on their part is on the table, by their public attempt to transform insurrectionists into heroes and martyrs. ---
**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:** [July 2, 2024, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/354 "2024-07-02T04:58:44Z")
> [@Aspenglow](#): > > Not “could.” It _does_ mean that, I’m afraid. Maybe I’m being Pollyannish about this, but I’m going to give Americans the benefit of the doubt. When they see Rule of Law disappearing, they’re not going to like it. I don’t want to think about what happens next. Note that I’m always defining "“rule of law” as it was defined by my Constitutional Law prof back in law school: “Yanno what ‘rule of law’ is? It means that those in power don’t make shit up to achieve their ends.” Exact quote; I’ve never forgotten it. And that’s not something I want to see in the United States: Those in power making shit up to achieve their ends. ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/355 "2024-07-02T05:00:20Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Unfortunately, we know for a fact that open and violent rebellion on their part is on the table, by their public attempt to transform insurrectionists into heroes and martyrs. - I’m far less worried about the open and violent rebellion parts than I am about the “legal” mechanisms they’ll use this time to throw the election to state legislatures. Dems need to understand that Republicans are playing for keeps in November. And I do mean keeps. ---
**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:** [July 2, 2024, 5:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/356 "2024-07-02T05:05:23Z")
> [@Aspenglow](#): > > No, because the SCOTUS has appointed itself the final arbiter of what constitutes an “official act.” I suspect there will be one standard for any Republican president and another for any Democratic one. I’m not so sure. I think SCOTUS has undervalued that the executive branch is the one with all the guns. I generally despise slippery slope arguments, but this feels like a potential for abuse those smug assholes did not anticipate. The leopards will be emboldened. “That is not an official act!” “That so? Let’s see what a new set of Justices think.” “We’re not going anywhere!” “That so? Let’s just see…” ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/357 "2024-07-02T05:50:19Z")
Okay, after some reading and thinking, I’m confused again. Most of the discussion so far seems predicated on the ruling saying that the president has _automatic, assumed_ immunity for acts committed _during_ a presidency, either while in office or afterwards. Is this correct? Either way, what exactly could a sitting president be charged criminally for during their presidency before this ruling? ---
**Author:** ![Horatius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/horatius/32/3572_2.png) [@Horatius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatius)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 6:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/358 "2024-07-02T06:35:06Z")
> [@Spoons](#): > > I agree with the two standard remark. Cripes, this could mean the end of rule of law in the United States. As soon as you have two standards, you’ve lost the rule of law. The whole point of the rule of law is that, if I read the law with a mind willing to understand it, I should be able to make a reasonable conclusion about whether or not I’m about to break that law with any given action. But now, there’s no way to make that reasonable conclusion, because the determination of whether or not it is illegal is entirely up to how the courts decide to read the law. ---
**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:** [July 2, 2024, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/359 "2024-07-02T06:54:45Z")
> [@Leaper](#): > > Either way, what exactly could a sitting president be charged criminally for during their presidency before this ruling? The question is what a president has to worry about being charged for once they’re out of office. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2024, 7:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/360 "2024-07-02T07:12:47Z")
Right, but that’s where I’m now confused with the SEAL team argument. How does taking away the threat of prosecution _after_ his term dissuade him from sending that SEAL team? Why would a president morally _capable_ of ordering such a thing _care_ about consequences after office? In what way would the prospect of prosecution then dissuade him from taking power now? Wouldn’t the threat of prosecution _have_ to be immediate to have a preventative effect when it comes to an office as powerful as the president? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188.md?page=17) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188.md?page=19)