# 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:** 2
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2024, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/21 "2024-02-06T16:54:40Z")
> [@asterion](#): > > He could order it and it would not happen as it’s clearly an illegal order. Clearly illegal according to whom? If the Supreme Court were to rule that any official act by the president is legal, then any order he gives must be legal. ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2024, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/22 "2024-02-06T16:56:52Z")
I particularly liked this line in the Court’s decision. > It would be a striking paradox if the President, who alone is vested with the constitutional duty to ‘take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,’ were the sole officer capable of defying those laws with impunity. ---
**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:** [February 6, 2024, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/23 "2024-02-06T16:58:34Z")
> [@Kent\_Clark](#): > > …were the sole officer… But but but he is not an officer!!! (so say some people…which I think is ridiculous) ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2024, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/24 "2024-02-06T16:58:58Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > If the Supreme Court were to rule that any official act by the president is legal, then any order he gives must be legal. Isn’t it possible for an order to be illegal, and for anyone following that order to be acting illegally, while the president alone has immunity from criminal liability for giving the order? ---
**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 6, 2024, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/25 "2024-02-06T16:59:56Z")
> [@asterion](#): > > I really wish people would stop claiming this as an example. He could order it and it would not happen as it’s clearly an illegal order. And he couldn’t be prosecuted for giving the illegal order which is illegal. ---
**Author:** ![asterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4da419/32.png) [@asterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asterion)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2024, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/26 "2024-02-06T17:00:02Z")
I don’t think “just following orders” would be a get out of jail free card. ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2024, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/27 "2024-02-06T17:06:24Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > Isn’t it possible for an order to be illegal, and for anyone following that order to be acting illegally, while the president alone has immunity from criminal liability for giving the order? I’m not a lawyer, and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if there are just those sorts of paradoxes in our legal system. However, I could certainly see some merit in the argument that if president can’t be punished then any action he takes must be legal, and members of the military are required to follow legal orders. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2024, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/28 "2024-02-06T17:07:19Z")
> [@jsc1953](#): > > It’s a sign of our times that I breathe a heavy sigh of relief when something sane and sensible happens. This. ---
**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:** [February 6, 2024, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/29 "2024-02-06T17:08:24Z")
> [@asterion](#): > > I don’t think “just following orders” would be a get out of jail free card. It’s not (I think Article 92 is failure to obey an order in the military): > The elements of Article 92 only apply if orders were issued lawfully. Orders or regulations that violate the Constitution, the laws of the United States, or lawful superior orders are considered unlawful. If an officer gave an order that they did not have the authority to give, that may also be unlawful. - [SOURCE](https://www.ucmjlaw.com/courts-martial/military-crimes/failure-to-obey-order-or-regulation/) ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2024, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/30 "2024-02-06T17:25:35Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > However, I could certainly see some merit in the argument that if president can’t be punished then any action he takes must be legal, and members of the military are required to follow legal orders. I don’t think this follows. Just because someone is immune from the consequences of illegal actions doesn’t make those actions legal. Maybe this is a bad analogy, but a witness can be granted immunity in exchange for testimony, but the witness’s actions remain illegal. A president might be granted immunity (or not, we suspect) due to his or her position, but it wouldn’t follow that all actions by the president are now legal. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2024, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/31 "2024-02-06T17:30:46Z")
> [@asterion](#): > > I don’t think “just following orders” would be a get out of jail free card. Can a pardon be a get out of jail free card? ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2024, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/32 "2024-02-06T17:43:48Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > I don’t think this follows. Just because someone is immune from the consequences of illegal actions doesn’t make those actions legal. _De facto_ legal, if not _de jure_. Suppose the Supreme Court did rule in favor of Trump’s appeal, that Trump is elected, and he then orders the military to kill someone. Someone in the chain of command refuses. Does anyone think that Trump wouldn’t prosecute (or at least replace) the officer who refused to follow his order? Personally, I really hope the Court rules against Trump. I don’t think the president, any president, should have _carte blanche_ to do anything they want without repurcussions. And I hope Seal Team Six would refuse to carry out a hit on orders from the president. It’s still an interesting, if exaggerated, example of the danger of presidential immunity. ---
**Author:** ![gnoitall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gnoitall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnoitall)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2024, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/33 "2024-02-06T17:47:08Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > I think Article 92 is failure to obey an order in the military Yes. > **[10 U.S. Code § 892 - Art. 92. Failure to obey order or regulation](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/892)** Note that “lawful” is baked right into the wording: > [@](#): > > Any person subject to this chapter who > > (1) violates or fails to obey any **lawful** general order or regulation… > > …shall be punished as a court-martial may direct. ---
**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:** [February 6, 2024, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/34 "2024-02-06T17:50:25Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Can a pardon be a get out of jail free card? Maybe. If the person believes the president will deliver on the promise to pardon (I am unclear if a pardon can be handed out before the crime…I think President Ford pardoned Nixon before Nixon was charged but it was also after the alleged crime had been committed). But, murder is a state crime (usually) so you’d need to get the governor of that state to agree to a pardon. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2024, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/35 "2024-02-06T17:53:05Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > > [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > > > If the Supreme Court rules in Trump’s favor on this (which they won’t) > > I don’t think there’s any question that the SC would eventually rule against him. I think this is entirely about whether they agree to _hear_ the case and enable him to _delay_ the DC trial. I agree completely with your reasoning. ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2024, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/36 "2024-02-06T17:53:29Z")
Or do it somewhere where only the feds have jurisdiction. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2024, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/37 "2024-02-06T17:55:44Z")
> [@asterion](#): > > I really wish people would stop claiming this as an example. He could order it and it would not happen as it’s clearly an illegal order. Do you seriously think that there are NO PEOPLE who would quickly obey a clearly illegal order? I mean, I’m sure that _some_ would not obey, but… ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2024, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/38 "2024-02-06T17:57:00Z")
> [@asterion](#): > > I don’t think “just following orders” would be a get out of jail free card. Then the president pardons them. Done and dusted! ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2024, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/39 "2024-02-06T18:08:07Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > But, murder is a state crime (usually) so you’d need to get the governor of that state to agree to a pardon. What if people in DC storm a building there and kill folks? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2024, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188/40 "2024-02-06T18:19:19Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > The rigged Supreme Court has a quandary. If they say Trump is immune then so is Biden and Biden can overthrow the next election if he loses with no consequence (or do anything like having the judges arrested). You give them too much credit. 2001 demonstrated that the Justices are willing to issue political rulings on openly partisan lines. And things have gone downhill since then. So the Republican majority in the Supreme Court might declare that Republican Presidents are immune to all prosecution for any laws they break before, during, or after their term of office and Democratic Presidents are not. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dc-court-of-appeals-rules-against-trump-immunity-scotus-makes-a-different-decision/997188.md?page=3)