Quote:
Originally Posted by Eisdrache
It's really not that crazy. SCOTUS didn't really have much ability to do anything in these cases since most of them didn't seek damages but instead sought prospective relief, which basically means preventing Trump from using his position to repeat this act or similar this in the future. And since Trump is not president anymore there is no real danger of this being the case.
|
Since atm the scholars conclusion is that a sitting president can't be prosecuted, this is a catch-22 situation where they will not make a POTUS stand trial when in or out of office. IMO (I am not a lawyer) the correct thing would have been to let the case go forward to set a precedent. What I see happening here is that in the future the SCOTUS might decide to go forward if said president is not of their liking (as in, justice with eyes wide open, not blind at all).