I am sorry folks, but SCOTUS ruling does NOT give Trump immunity because we forgot one angle ...
🐴 SEMI SHITPOST 💩
Here is the next Novel Legal Theory thats gonna drop from the Dems (and I have to warn you, this one has merit):
Based on the Organic Act of 1871, when DC was created, DC was never part of the US and hence SCOTUS has no jurisdiction whatsoever on the DC courts.
Basically, SCOTUS remanded back to the COURTS to inquire regarding immunity outlining the levels of immunity with regards to certain actions by POTUS and prohibition to obtain records while probing into the matters. The language seems to indicate that it should not be about Trump as POTUS, but the actions coming out of the position of a POTUS.
However, this is based on an indictment issued by an imposter, meaning, the indictment holds no grounds, has no standing, and then the question becomes whether the courts can look at the questions itself based on a fraudulent indictment, which cannot have standing in court i.e. there are no questions regarding immunity at this point.
In other words: my expectation is that the case is moot, and only when the defects are remedied lawfully, questions can come before the court.
I agree, and I think when it finally gets back to SCOTUS with everything clarified, it will be a 9-0 decision