https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/04/breaking-supreme-court-blocks-trumps-use-alien-enemies/
On the books for more than a hundred years, but now its a problem based on a ruling by a group of compromised overrated lawyers in a black dress.
This upcoming Trump response should be pretty epic.
Yes, any actions they take after leaving office would be fair game, but for actions taken while in office, immunity still applies and would require impeachment if they are to be charged with a crime for those actions.
I'm fairly certain that is what Trump argued during his immunity case, and it makes sense if you think about it. They tried to go after him for taking "illegal" actions while he was President and SCOTUS ruled he was protected by immunity. While he was out of office, he would not have had that protection for actions taken during that time.
In Biden's case, he is not in office and will not seek any future office, so both of those points are moot, but he still retains immunity for official acts as president until he is impeached.
That's what I said.
The SCOTUS ruling said Presidents retained immunity for any legal actions they did under recognized Presidential Authority. They are given wide leeway, but if for example a President walked over to CONgress and shot the Speaker in the head he would not have immunity.
I asked Grok to briefly explain the ruling:
In Trump v. United States (July 1, 2024), the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that former presidents have absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within their core constitutional powers (e.g., pardons, military command) and presumptive immunity for other official acts within the "outer perimeter" of their responsibilities. No immunity applies to unofficial or private acts. The decision, split along ideological lines, delays Donald Trump's 2020 election interference case by remanding it to lower courts to determine which acts are official or unofficial, likely preventing a trial before the 2024 election. Critics argue it weakens accountability, while supporters claim it protects executive function.
Alright, so what are we disagreeing about?
Are you saying Biden can be charged without being impeached for unofficial acts while he was president? I would agree with that statement, but the problem I have is that doing so gets us nowhere, other than more political drama. If they (white hats) can prove he committed treason, especially prior to assuming the office of President, that would be impeachable, so would remove all immunity for everything he did during the entirety of his term, which I think is what we all want.
That's just it. Impeachment is not required, and doesn't remove immunity anyway. That would have to be ruled on by the judiciary - not CONgress. Immunity shouldn't actually matter for an impeachment - only a criminal trial. Remember - impeachment isn't a criminal trial. It is a purely political procedure to remove an officer from office, and restrict them for life. The President would still have their immunity for any legal actions. Treason of course is not a legal core Presidential action, so Biden could be prosecuted for that and impeachment would not be required or necessary. Because impeachment is not criminal, double jeopardy does not come into play either - even if CONgress decides to do an impeachment.
In your example of treason before assuming office, that might be possible because the Constitution is very vague on this. It says "high crimes and misdemeanors" of course, but interestingly it does not actually restrict when those crimes took place. It could mean only during the time in office, or it could include actions before the presidency, meaning that a future President did not have the character to actually be POTUS. I don't think CONgress would convict on something before a presidency, when they could defer to the DOJ for charges (assuming a fair DOJ). Also - even if an impeachment was tried and it failed -- or succeeded, civilian charges and a trial would still be held.
An impeachment would be a waste of time and energy. Look at the last 2 Presidents who were impeached. They meant nothing. Clinton completed his term. Trump (twice) completed his term - and is now serving another. Both were impeached, but neither one was convicted in the Senate. Biden would possibly be impeached if it happened while the Republicans hold the House. He would very likely be acquitted in the Senate since a 2/3 vote (67 out of 100 Senators) would be required. It would also be dangerous, as the MSM would carry the water for the demons and poison the already left-leaning jury pools for any criminal trial. ("Look - see? Even CONgress doesn't believe he committed treason." - CNN)
Thanks by the way for this back and forth. I love stuff like this because it not only makes me think and learn more, but the anons reading this get to do the same.
So I just asked Perplexity this question and it appears you are correct so I will concede. Thanks for this discussion as well.