It’s an unanswered question, but the SCOTUS immunity ruling makes it mostly moot anyway. A President can’t be charged with crimes related to “official business.” Which specific acts count as official vs unofficial depends on the interpretation of a judge/justice, and probably gets extremely messy and inconsistent, which is why the ruling is considered problematic by most.
They can NOT pardon to protect themselves from impeachment.
Hopefully it can be established that granting favors and adding to their personal wealth are not official business. Really is any criminal act official business, I think not.
Not going to make a top level comment since this may be considered sort of a tangent, but there is chatter about lots of White House staff asking for pardons, since they aren’t necessarily immune. The thing is, once someone gets a pardon, and they no longer face prosecution, there is no danger of self-incrimination, and the 5th Amendment right to not speak largely disappears. I.e. they could be compelled to testify against Trump.
So does Trump throw all these people under the bus by making them face criminal prosecution for his crimes, or does he make them immune and increase the risk (even if only reputational) to himself? Investigators could easily offer immunity in exchange for testimony even without a pardon. I think we know which he’ll choose, but it leaves both sides pitted against one another.
It’s an unanswered question, but the SCOTUS immunity ruling makes it mostly moot anyway. A President can’t be charged with crimes related to “official business.” Which specific acts count as official vs unofficial depends on the interpretation of a judge/justice, and probably gets extremely messy and inconsistent, which is why the ruling is considered problematic by most.
They can NOT pardon to protect themselves from impeachment.
Neat.
Next non-fascist president, having a monkey-paw moment, gets the Tribunal of Six in the same room and locks the door
Alito begins to speak
BAM
Hopefully it can be established that granting favors and adding to their personal wealth are not official business. Really is any criminal act official business, I think not.
I would like to see this immunity tested thoroughly very soon
Not going to make a top level comment since this may be considered sort of a tangent, but there is chatter about lots of White House staff asking for pardons, since they aren’t necessarily immune. The thing is, once someone gets a pardon, and they no longer face prosecution, there is no danger of self-incrimination, and the 5th Amendment right to not speak largely disappears. I.e. they could be compelled to testify against Trump.
So does Trump throw all these people under the bus by making them face criminal prosecution for his crimes, or does he make them immune and increase the risk (even if only reputational) to himself? Investigators could easily offer immunity in exchange for testimony even without a pardon. I think we know which he’ll choose, but it leaves both sides pitted against one another.
The snake may be about to eat itself.