Supreme Court Justice John Roberts has been left “shaken” by the unexpected public reaction to his ruling in the Donald Trumppresidential immunity case, a columnist wrote Friday.

Slate’s judicial writer Dahlia Lithwick wrote that Roberts was left shocked that Americans didn’t buy his attempt to persuade them that his ruling was not about Trump, but instead focused on the office of the presidency. The court ruled that a president was largely immune from criminal prosecution for official actions.

Lithwick referenced a report by CNN’s Joan Biskupic. He “was shaken by the adverse public reaction to his decision affording [Donald] Trump substantial immunity from criminal prosecution," she wrote.

"His protestations that the case concerned the presidency, not Trump, held little currency.”

  • Billiam@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    6 days ago

    Roberts was left shocked that Americans didn’t buy his attempt to persuade them that his ruling was not about Trump, but instead focused on the office of the presidency. The court ruled that a president was largely immune from criminal prosecution for official actions.

    AND WHICH FUCKING PRESIDENT’S ACTIONS ARE WE TALKING ABOUT HERE, JOHN?

  • Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Shaken? Right because you weren’t being a partisan hack when the special counsel asked to skip straight to proceedings because they knew the court wanted to issue a ruling and you drug your feet buying donald time. Then handed him powers not afforded in the constitution. But keep clutching those pearls.

  • Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    7 days ago

    He’s an out of touch rich asshole. I’m less surprised at his shock than I am surprised by him giving a fuck.

  • n0m4n@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    6 days ago

    Why is there a presumption of immunity? Even when there is clear self-serving corruption, the presumption of immunity takes precedence. This will go down in history as an abysmally bad decision.

  • sik0fewl@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    7 days ago

    You mean the one where he ruled that the United States has a government of men, and not of laws?

  • collapse_already@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 days ago

    I would be worried to if I had just given the president immunity for all official acts. Example of a worrisome formula: Biden + official act + seal team 6 + corrupt supreme court judges = no need to pack the court to give it a liberal majority.

  • Awesomo85@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    88
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    Remember folks: political violence is totally justified and not authoritarian a long as it’s not against a Democrat!

    Democrats are the chosen political party! They are better than you! They know what’s best for you! Fuck you for having any ideals that go against their infallible ideology!

    You’re a stupid piece of shit if you aren’t a Democrat! So you deserve violence against you!

    It’s not terrorism, it’s “fuck you, you aren’t a Democrat so you deserve it!”

    • sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      99% of political violence in this country is from your side, but its a classic republican move to attempt to blame everyone else with the charges of the stuff your side is actually doing itself. So you’re just a tired and not very original liar/troll. Arent there snowflake/safespace threads you should be on? You might get your feelings hurt here or god forbid, talk to a female and that would be a real tragedy because you might go hurt someone because of it. Or kick/kill an animal seems to be the thing your side prattles on about lately isnt it.

      But yes, boohoo you’re a victim and dems are violent. message received.

      • Awesomo85@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        35
        ·
        6 days ago

        " your side".

        See, people just assume that if you don’t agree with the general ideology, you are an enemy.

        I tend to agree with most socially “left” ideas, but because I don’t want tax money to go toward wars or abortion as a form of birth control, I am a totalitarian piece of shit.

        There is no nuance anymore. It’s always: “you are either with us or against us” mentality. And there is absolutely NO WAY you can tell me that’s not the case (at least on social media).

        • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          6 days ago

          See, people just assume that if you don’t agree with the general ideology, you are an enemy.

          You’re the one that came in with “Democrats bad”. This was about “of course presidents shouldn’t have immunity FFS.”

        • sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          that is an interesting observation. The idea of coalitions has seemingly broken down and its as you said now for everyone-- you’re onboard with whatever the dems or repubs say and do, or you are labeled as supporting the enemy and a memebr of their camp. And no one puts forth a platform or plans like they used to. What a time to be alive eh.

          I do wonder if this is the end of the American government. It sounds alarmist and a little crazy but also plausible. Fundamental architectural peices of our government are breaking down-- like when the supreme court ruled that presidents are not legally unaccounatble and presumed acting legally no matter what they do. Its not just problematic its broken. So now we inevitably get to watch that break spectacularly., standing here with our genitals in our hands. Does that mean seal team 6 shooting Americans like the news said was possible? I dont know. But its legally allowed now, so…?

    • morphballganon@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      6 days ago

      Do you feel the same way about medicine and food?

      Democracy, medicine and food all have the same goal, making life better.

      Being against democracy is like criticising someone for eating or using antibiotics.

      Are you just admitting to being a complete moron here?

      • Awesomo85@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        22
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        I feel that the product of someone else’s labor is not a right just because you want the product but don’t want to go through the process of learning how to create that product. Just because it’s a specialized trade doesn’t mean you automatically have a right to it!

  • originalfrozenbanana@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    220
    ·
    7 days ago

    He’s not serious. Roberts is an arch conservative and has been for a long time. This is posturing to try and paint himself as a moderate, like he has been doing since before he was appointed to the bench. Fuck him.

    • karashta@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      93
      ·
      7 days ago

      “You mean my radical and insane interpretations of the law are insane and radical?”.

      Yeah, he fucking knows and is a piece of shit like the rest of these disingenuous monsters

      • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 days ago

        He’s just not as confident in the shoot-the-moon approach that the rest of the fascists are using to try and take/keep power.

    • Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      7 days ago

      How could he possibly have been surprised by the response? They are with 9 judges. Three vehemently disagreed with the ruling and even Barret partially disagreed. It’s not like he was looking for some compromise ruling that all judges signed onto. Pathetic reporting.

      • krashmo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        None of that is true in any way. They are a relevant, useful, very much still in use, tool for conservatives to undermine democracy. I don’t understand why you chose a single one of those descriptors.