Summary

The U.S. Supreme Court’s July ruling in Trump v United States granted Donald Trump immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken in his official capacity changes fundamentally the dynamics of the Oval Office. This decision shields a sitting president from legal accountability for official acts, enabling unlawful behavior without consequence.

Critics, including Michael Waldman of the Brennan Center for Justice, argue that this ruling provides a “how-to guide” for presidential lawbreaking.

The Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority, solidified by Trump’s three appointees, has previously overturned Roe v. Wade, and now, with this immunity ruling, further consolidates presidential power. If Trump is re-elected, this immunity could embolden him to pursue aggressive policies without fear of legal repercussions, raising concerns about unchecked executive authority and the erosion of democratic checks and balances.

      • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        13 days ago

        Its not objectifying because pretty women make you feel good by seeing them in public.

        Did you do something wrong? Are you supposed to avoid looking at people in public? What if you said all the women were dressed in fun outfits, is that different?

        Its not like you said they were there for your pleasure or something, it was a simple report of the things you liked about a location.