|
Pwnallthethings@pwnallthethings.bsky.social |
occurs to me that bribing the president is now /always/ legal, since in every case the only way to distinguish gratuity from bribe is via evidence that could never be admissible
19 replies 113 reposts 486 likes
|
Grudgie the Whale
@grudgie.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Goodbye Emoluments Clause too
1 replies 0 reposts 21 likes
|
Coriolus Nimrod
@coriolusn.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Also, a bribe is by its nature a payment for an official act, and you can't offer any evidence that the official act was actually done.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Phasmatic
@phasmatic.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Gonna be fun on Jan 21 when everyone with money realizes they are now employees of Donald Trump. Play ball, pay tribute, all your legal woes go away. Or, get Khodorkovskied.
0 replies 0 reposts 2 likes
|
|
Phasmatic
@phasmatic.bsky.social
[ View ] |
The emoluments clause of the constitution is unconstitutional, who knew?
0 replies 0 reposts 4 likes
|
mjec
@mjec.net
[ View ] |
The president owns the privilege though right, so could waive it if they wanted you prosecuted?
1 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
|
Jarod Johnson
@jarodjohnson.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Trump could auction off foreign policy live at the State of the Union, since both that speech and handling foreign policy are core presidential duties.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
ManhattanJuryAppreciator
@ratelimitexceeder.bsky.social
[ View ] |
The pretty much explicit text of the opinion is that selling a Cabinet position or a pardon is never illegal. So why not do it?
1 replies 1 reposts 26 likes
|
Jorge Caballero
@datadrivenmd.social
[ View ] |
Continuing to pull on this thread: would evidence from impeachment proceedings be inadmissible in a follow-on criminal proceeding? Are members of a jury supposed to pretend they didn't see any of the evidence stemming from a Congressional investigation?
0 replies 0 reposts 5 likes
|
The Next Day
@incompetusrex.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I remember Roberts expressing some concern about excluding official acts from evidence in bribery cases in the first half of the argument. I guess it’s just another example of how you can’t alway predict the final outcome based on oral argument.
0 replies 0 reposts 7 likes
|
Difficult Opinions
@difficultopinions.bsky.social
[ View ] |
It seems what's legal or not is unimportant, now that the president can instruct the DOJ to do as the president pleases. This is the future for a 2nd Trump admin.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Quinta Jurecic
@qjurecic.bsky.social
[ View ] |
yup
2 replies 0 reposts 24 likes
|
robert p. baird
@bobbybaird.bsky.social
[ View ] |
This is the part that even ACB couldn't abide, correct?
0 replies 1 reposts 9 likes
|
Ariellah | אריאלה
@sodone.bsky.social
[ View ] |
So much horrifying fridge logic with this ruling
0 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
BikeMikeBike
@thespinner.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Not legal, not illegal, but a secret third thing (unprosecutable).
0 replies 0 reposts 6 likes
|
Don Zeko
@donzeko.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I think it's theoretically possible for a president to be prosecuted for obstruction of justice, but basically guaranteed that no case would actually be tryable.
3 replies 0 reposts 8 likes
|
David Elwell
@drelwell.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I fear that a taste of these privileges might discourage the incumbent from leaving office when the time comes.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Two all the way, a coffee milk, and a Del's
@ri.oldfolkshome.org
[ View ] |
Yeah, that's @benjaminwittes.bsky.social 's position aswell.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Andrew Rothstein
@asrothstein.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Can’t question the president’s intent in taking official acts and official acts are undefined and seemingly limitless. Statesmanship includes accepting gifts and gratuities I guess.
1 replies 0 reposts 5 likes
|
Cryin Boytano
@boytano.bsky.social
[ View ] |
tbh SCOTUS really did do a good job tying all the loose threads together at the end
0 replies 0 reposts 4 likes