|
@awfullyvague.bsky.social |
Why has USG always maintained that? AFAIK, the Constitution explicitly says that legislators are immune for certain acts, but never says that the President is. Are we just supposed to assume that that was an oopsie-oversight and they meant to include the President?
1 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
|
Kalanyr
@kalanyr.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Immunity for reasonable acts taken in good faith is mostly assumed in common law so that's plausible the USG expanding its prerogative as far as they think they can get away with is their standard position on everything pretty much so it's not unexpected.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes