Latest Breaking News

Farmer-Rick

(10,886 posts)

4. I am not as worried about this type of immunity

Tue Jul 2, 2024, 08:12 AM

Jul 2

It's a bad decision by the dancing Supremes but it is very similar to the types of immunity a military officer has.

If an officer ordered an attack and enlisted men were killed, the officer can not be charged with murder. The officer is considered immune from prosecution for official acts.

A Captain of a ship can order a person be put on bread and water as punishment for violations of the UCMJ. If the person dies because he had undiagnosed diabetes, and this was a real case that happened, the Captain can not be prosecuted because it was an official act. But the doctor monitoring him was brought up on charges.

But if the Captain of the ship sexually harassed one of his crew, the Captain has no immunity because misconduct is not considered part of his official duties.

So, other executive branch members have immunity from prosecution for official acts.

The trick is pulling apart what is official and what is not. In almost every case, misconduct is not considered part of their official duties.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

37 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

New York Dem will introduce amendment to reverse Supreme Court immunity ruling [View all] BumRushDaShow Jul 2 OP

Add to the amendment an ethics code, 18 year term limits and other sensible reforms Pepsidog Jul 2 #1

Not IF, but when. aeromanKC Jul 2 #2

Visibility is beneficial even if it's going nowhere now. /nt bucolic_frolic Jul 2 #3

I am not as worried about this type of immunity Farmer-Rick Jul 2 #4

This is little more than theatre at this time, it is going nowhere and everyone knows it. Bev54 Jul 2 #5

Ah, the inevitable naysayer NJCher Jul 2 #6

There currently are not enough votes in Congress to meet wnylib Jul 2 #9

It might NJCher Jul 2 #12

I hope that's true because, to pass it, we will need wnylib Jul 2 #16

Yes NJCher Jul 2 #22

No, I am not a writer. Not professionally anyway. wnylib Jul 2 #24

-- NJCher Jul 2 #25

"I am not saying that we shouldn't try it" BumRushDaShow Jul 2 #14

I am hardly a naysayer, quite the opposite but I am realistic. Bev54 Jul 2 #30

"Solutions need to be realistic" BumRushDaShow Jul 2 #7

Oh and have you noticed NJCher Jul 2 #8

You sure are quick to label someone, instead of calling someone down, maybe just make your argument. Bev54 Jul 2 #31

I don't need your help in what to post NJCher Jul 2 #35

Such a lovely person Bev54 Jul 2 #37

You can call it theater, but it is important to do everything we can to bring this to the attention of the public. Many Martin68 Jul 2 #29

Even if we could get the votes Miguelito Loveless Jul 2 #10

Where did he say that? NJCher Jul 2 #11

Have you been reading the rulings of late? Miguelito Loveless Jul 2 #17

of course NJCher Jul 2 #23

That does not mean you have read the ruling Bev54 Jul 2 #32

here ya' go NJCher Jul 2 #33

Roberts actually walked back some of the Clarence Thomas-written "Bruen" decision BumRushDaShow Jul 2 #28

Dead on arrival The Grand Illuminist Jul 2 #13

re: "the judgement is virtually final" -- "No it's not." thesquanderer Jul 2 #15

My complaint WAS about how it was phrased BumRushDaShow Jul 2 #18

To me, "virtually final" was a way to help explain the siginficance of this amendment being offered... thesquanderer Jul 2 #21

To follow-up BumRushDaShow Jul 2 #27

I hope I live to see the day when this SCOTUS ruling is declared null and void FakeNoose Jul 2 #19

Worth a shot. BlueWavePsych Jul 2 #20

Just wondering.... MorbidButterflyTat Jul 2 #26

Do it and good luck to you. republianmushroom Jul 2 #34

Question, Would the lynching of the VP been cover as an official act, republianmushroom Jul 2 #36