Latest Breaking News

Farmer-Rick

(11,715 posts)

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

Tue Jul 2, 2024, 08:12 AM

Jul 2024

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.

Recommendations

4 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

duhneece Pinback LeftInTX dweller

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 2024 OP

Add to the amendment an ethics code, 18 year term limits and other sensible reforms Pepsidog Jul 2024 #1

Not IF, but when. aeromanKC Jul 2024 #2

Visibility is beneficial even if it's going nowhere now. /nt bucolic_frolic Jul 2024 #3

I am not as worried about this type of immunity Farmer-Rick Jul 2024 #4

This is little more than theatre at this time, it is going nowhere and everyone knows it. Bev54 Jul 2024 #5

Ah, the inevitable naysayer NJCher Jul 2024 #6

There currently are not enough votes in Congress to meet wnylib Jul 2024 #9

It might NJCher Jul 2024 #12

I hope that's true because, to pass it, we will need wnylib Jul 2024 #16

Yes NJCher Jul 2024 #22

No, I am not a writer. Not professionally anyway. wnylib Jul 2024 #24

-- NJCher Jul 2024 #25

"I am not saying that we shouldn't try it" BumRushDaShow Jul 2024 #14

I am hardly a naysayer, quite the opposite but I am realistic. Bev54 Jul 2024 #30

"Solutions need to be realistic" BumRushDaShow Jul 2024 #7

Oh and have you noticed NJCher Jul 2024 #8

You sure are quick to label someone, instead of calling someone down, maybe just make your argument. Bev54 Jul 2024 #31

I don't need your help in what to post NJCher Jul 2024 #35

Such a lovely person Bev54 Jul 2024 #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 2024 #29

Even if we could get the votes Miguelito Loveless Jul 2024 #10

Where did he say that? NJCher Jul 2024 #11

Have you been reading the rulings of late? Miguelito Loveless Jul 2024 #17

of course NJCher Jul 2024 #23

That does not mean you have read the ruling Bev54 Jul 2024 #32

here ya' go NJCher Jul 2024 #33

Roberts actually walked back some of the Clarence Thomas-written "Bruen" decision BumRushDaShow Jul 2024 #28

Dead on arrival The Grand Illuminist Jul 2024 #13

re: "the judgement is virtually final" -- "No it's not." thesquanderer Jul 2024 #15

My complaint WAS about how it was phrased BumRushDaShow Jul 2024 #18

To me, "virtually final" was a way to help explain the siginficance of this amendment being offered... thesquanderer Jul 2024 #21

To follow-up BumRushDaShow Jul 2024 #27

I hope I live to see the day when this SCOTUS ruling is declared null and void FakeNoose Jul 2024 #19

Worth a shot. BlueWavePsych Jul 2024 #20

Just wondering.... MorbidButterflyTat Jul 2024 #26

Do it and good luck to you. republianmushroom Jul 2024 #34

Question, Would the lynching of the VP been cover as an official act, republianmushroom Jul 2024 #36