• ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      60
      ·
      5 months ago

      Sure. Even better, if you replace them with ones that will rule this was an error and the president only gets qualified immunity, you’ll still be in the clear because you were acting on what you thought the law was.

      • xenoclast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        The better move is actually remove the SC, replace it with a new one that repeals all Republican changes since 1980.

        Allow the president immunity until the end of this term, then make it a death penalty offence to basically do anything Trump or his cronies have done.

        After all of MAGAs leaders are in jail or in the ground for the treason they committed RETIRE and hold an election again.

        Their plan will be put back decades AND it’ll be in the light of day for everyone to see.

        We can’t win forever but we can win for a while longer

    • atrielienz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      If he went to their homes and strangled them himself? Yes. If he ordered someone to do it? The laws and UCMJ apply to those people so no. There’s this thing people keep forgetting about. The UCMJ isn’t just guidelines. It’s actual rules. And murder is still illegal.

      • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        5 months ago

        If he went to their homes and strangled them himself?

        I was actually think of him pulling a Vlad the Impaler and inviting them over for dinner.

        The UCMJ isn’t just guidelines. It’s actual rules. And murder is still illegal.

        If there’s anything I learned from the Trump years, hell even the Bush II years, is that there are no rules if no one enforces them.

      • Muehe@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        5 months ago

        IANAL, but there is the presidential power to pardon. So the president could in theory give an illegal order (as long as it is an official act they have immunity) and promise a presidential pardon once the order is fulfilled (therefore extending immunity to the perpetrator). Meaning the president can entirely circumvent the UCMJ.

        • atrielienz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          And those people would still face state charges because that’s how that works. You can’t get a presidential pardon for state crimes.

          • ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            5 months ago

            Can you face state charges for murder if you’re already facing federal charges for the same killing (you crossed state lines)? That sounds like double jeopardy to me.

            • atrielienz@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Yes. You can face state and federal charges separately. Double jeopardy is when they charge for the same crime twice in the same court (state or federal), after you’ve either been convicted or been acquitted.

              Specifically they would have to have new evidence in order to charge you a second time in either federal or state court.

            • atrielienz@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              The Criminal Division of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia is responsible for processing all local criminal matters including felony, misdemeanor, District of Columbia code violations and criminal traffic cases.

          • Muehe@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Ok yeah fair enough, that sounds reasonable. But to my knowledge the UMCJ is a federal law, not a state law, so how does that line of argument factor in there? You cited that as an example of checks and balances that would prevent people from following illegal orders, but it being a federal law still means the president could circumvent it with the official order plus pardon combo, at least if my understanding of this new supreme court ruling is correct.

            • atrielienz@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Because (just like in NY with Trump, and specific charges, if a crime is committed within a state the state has the right to prosecute regardless of impeachment or federal charges. The UCMJ is technically federal law. But we’re looking at three different aspects of lawful charges for persons who might commit a crime per the Presidents order. The president could absolutely pardon the persons involved. But only at the federal level. There’s nothing stopping the state or states from prosecuting the same individual. It’s not just one set of checks and balances is my point. The department of justice can also bring charges regardless of UCMJ tribunal (Court Material). Which is really where double jeopardy should kick in but doesn’t for service members.

              Additionally and most importantly actually, a court martial conviction for murder would result in a dishonorable discharge from the military. That can’t be overturned by a presidential pardon. They would lose their benefits. Medical and so on. Pensions. It’s a cost benefit analysis at that point. They don’t just get to walk away no harm no foul cause presidential pardon.