President’s immunity

He’s why they’re talking: I have listened with great interest to the recaps of the Supreme Court hearings on presidential immunity. Much of the discussion has been about the effect of any rulings on future presidents and their potential for committing illegal acts. Of course, the deliberations are not specifically regarding the former president and his actions. However, they are disregarding the underlying point of these proceedings, as I see it.

Never before (at least since Nixon) has anyone seriously thought a president of the United States would act as Donald Trump has acted, on multiple fronts, or that any future president would consider the possibility of such actions. If not for Trump and his fellow (alleged) conspirators, the subject of presidential immunity would never have even come before the court.

In fact, SCOTUS is likely to send the case back to a lower court to decide between what was done as president and what was done as a private citizen. Then, if tried and convicted for any of the numerous charges, Trump will work his way back up to SCOTUS on appeals and then they will decide on his guilt or innocence … unless he is elected, and pardons himself along with all the other members of his cabal.

One more thing … if Trump is elected in November and granted full immunity for any action taken as president, then would not that same immunity apply to still-President Biden? And would it not then be perfectly legal for him to take any action necessary to deny Trump his presidential powers? Asking for a friend!

CHUCK GOSS

Little Rock