‘The constitution doesn’t even mention immunity’: Judge Luttig reacts to Trump Immunity claim

Sdílet
Vložit
  • čas přidán 30. 04. 2024
  • Former Federal Judge Michal Luttig joins Nicolle Wallace on Deadline White House to react to the arguments made by Donald Trump and his legal team to the Supreme Court that a President has absolute immunity for any acts he commits while President and why it has no basis in even the Constitution.
    » Subscribe to MSNBC: / msnbc
    Download our new MSNBC app for the latest breaking news and daily headlines at a glance: www.msnbc.com/information/dow...
    Follow MSNBC Show Blogs
    MaddowBlog: www.msnbc.com/maddowblog
    ReidOut Blog: www.msnbc.com/reidoutblog
    MSNBC delivers breaking news, in-depth analysis of politics headlines, as well as commentary and informed perspectives. Find video clips and segments from The Rachel Maddow Show, Morning Joe, The Beat with Ari Melber, Deadline: White House, The ReidOut, All In, Last Word, 11th Hour, and Alex Wagner who brings her breadth of reporting experience to MSNBC primetime. Watch “Alex Wagner Tonight” Tuesday through Friday at 9pm Eastern.
    Connect with MSNBC Online
    Visit msnbc.com: www.msnbc.com/
    Subscribe to the MSNBC Daily Newsletter: link.msnbc.com/join/5ck/msnbc...
    Find MSNBC on Facebook: / msnbc
    Follow MSNBC on Twitter: / msnbc
    Follow MSNBC on Instagram: / msnbc
    #Trump #donaldtrump #immunity

Komentáře • 1,6K

  • @PKing-px5dg
    @PKing-px5dg Před 16 dny +140

    A Supreme Court enabling an Insurrectionist should be removed immediately per the 14th Amendment, then referred to the DOJ for charges! Period!

    • @JoeJoe-di4oj
      @JoeJoe-di4oj Před 15 dny

      The United States government has turned MAGA we are doomed 😮

    • @12magus
      @12magus Před 15 dny +3

      Their positions are theirs only for good behavior. Read Article III.

    • @paramaniacwolverine843
      @paramaniacwolverine843 Před 15 dny +1

      please indicate where he was charged for 'insurrection' and proven guilty?
      I've seen more damage at a frat party.
      Speaking of which, what's going on at the universities at the moment? Building walls and such. Interesting times!

    • @bobheck8326
      @bobheck8326 Před 15 dny +9

      @@paramaniacwolverine843 YOU'RE OBVIOUSLY A LIAR.

    • @cassandra9699
      @cassandra9699 Před 15 dny +8

      It's all a part of the slow motion coup. All of that from 2020 is still underway.

  • @balrog322
    @balrog322 Před 16 dny +181

    Thank you, Judge Luttig, a pity you aren’t a member of the Supreme Court.

    • @nonya.bizness
      @nonya.bizness Před 16 dny +4

      he's the og of anti-abortion judges.

    • @balrog322
      @balrog322 Před 16 dny +7

      @@nonya.bizness All I can say to that is nobody’s perfect. I would feel better all the same if his assessment of Trump’s claim was the Court’s final decision in this case.

    • @normthompson923
      @normthompson923 Před 16 dny +4

      If enough vote blue he may be put in after next election.Three dem. judges need to be installed so that scotus works again.Or two and impeach Thomas.

    • @sheilaboston7051
      @sheilaboston7051 Před 15 dny +4

      @@normthompson923 He's 70 years old now - any new appointments need to be much younger, or the SC could end up with another Republican stooge.

    • @kybed
      @kybed Před 14 dny

      listen also to george conway's take, he has somewhat a different take.. after listening to the hearing i understand now why there is a need for this.. 3 equal branches of government.. i realized the scotus is actually following due process..

  • @rebeccaryderagreetotally.5895

    Thank you Justice Jackson , for stating things in a reality based way.

    • @Swansong-recorders
      @Swansong-recorders Před 16 dny +20

      Agreed she is staying the straight up obviousness of how stupid their argument is

    • @mvp1116
      @mvp1116 Před 16 dny

      But she doesn't call her colleagues out on their BS. She is just as bad..

    • @marshcreek4355
      @marshcreek4355 Před 16 dny +7

      @@mvp1116 Unfortunately, she can't be at war with her peers whom she may have to work with for 20+ years barring the unforeseen. There is a way to engage in intellectual warfare with calling people out directly. She did that.

    • @afry6400
      @afry6400 Před 15 dny +2

      @@mvp1116 You really don't think that her questions qualify as calling them out by pointing out the obvious that they all should already have in mind?? Interesting... I thought she did exactly that without being blunt about it.

  • @ronlokk
    @ronlokk Před 16 dny +55

    So absurd that the court would even consider this.

  • @tomcassidy2525
    @tomcassidy2525 Před 16 dny +515

    asking for immunity ... while claiming to be innocent ?

    • @donaldspaulding6973
      @donaldspaulding6973 Před 16 dny +1

      Common sense which many (some on SCOTUS) lack.

    • @swimminginthoughts
      @swimminginthoughts Před 16 dny +3

      Not quite, but keep saying this because it's cute!

    • @DavidStrchld
      @DavidStrchld Před 16 dny +14

      And also claiming that the current president who trump claims is crooked, would get off scott free.

    • @markkozlowski3674
      @markkozlowski3674 Před 16 dny +1

      There is no inconsistency in that. Immunity is a defense to prosecution. It is in no way an admission of guilt.

    • @DebORahDramatica
      @DebORahDramatica Před 16 dny +1

      ​@@swimminginthoughtsMY GIRLFRIEND SYBIL HAS A CUTE TRILL WHEN SHE SINGS!🤬

  • @niclewis9610
    @niclewis9610 Před 16 dny +151

    Only the Guilty and Criminals need or want absolute immunity.

    • @jameswheeler349
      @jameswheeler349 Před 16 dny +5

      Well that is obvious to anyone with a brain

    • @mrmark8603
      @mrmark8603 Před 16 dny +7

      @@jameswheeler349 That discounts 70 million MAGATS!

    • @jamesdouthat3999
      @jamesdouthat3999 Před 16 dny

      wrong

    • @robsemail
      @robsemail Před 15 dny

      @@jamesdouthat3999 no, actually it’s absolutely correct. Sorry.

    • @mrmark8603
      @mrmark8603 Před 15 dny +2

      @@jamesdouthat3999 I'm sure you hear that a lot.

  • @user-ec9sj6ku5m
    @user-ec9sj6ku5m Před 16 dny +72

    I still can’t believe this went to the Supreme

  • @johnschmitt8046
    @johnschmitt8046 Před 16 dny +88

    The real question is why does it matter if they were Official or Private acts! If you break the law, you break the law!! The rest of us don't get to hide behind our jobs?

    • @shaystern2453
      @shaystern2453 Před 16 dny +3

      but trump wants to

    • @barrylenihan8032
      @barrylenihan8032 Před 16 dny +3

      President Truman didn't shirk from his responsibility as President. He had a motto on his desk that said 'the buck stops here'.

    • @ariaflame-au
      @ariaflame-au Před 16 dny +1

      Unless you are a cop

    • @ericvanjames8395
      @ericvanjames8395 Před 16 dny +1

      Excellent point!

    • @geekchameleon
      @geekchameleon Před 16 dny

      "The law" as you refer to it, is created by Congress, which means that under this theory, they could revoke every single authority and duty of the President regardless of what the Constitution says. The next time the president and Congress are controlled by the same party, at the end of his term, the next president can be castrated and made to serve solely at the discretion of the party in control of Congress.
      You _really_ want to be careful what you wish for. Since Biden has ordered those who exercise his authority to ignore and wilfully violate the law, and dismantled the tools that proved successful at enforcing the law, there is a whole lot of room to prosecute him for his absolute disregard for enforcing immigration laws among others.
      You can not simultaneously argue that Mayorkas is just following orders, so shouldn't face any penalties _and_ that the man who gave those orders can't be, either. You can not simultaneously argue that Trump has no immunity, but Biden does. You have no right to complain if the principles you try to put in place for your enemy are used against your ally. If the government is weaponized against Trump, it will most assuredly be weaponized against "your guy" in the not too distant future. The Democrats in congress have pulled the "nuclear option" and had it used against them the next term enough times to prove that once you pull a weapon, the same becomes available to your opponent.

  • @brentbarnhart5827
    @brentbarnhart5827 Před 16 dny +141

    jUDGE lUTTIG, IS A TRUE PATRIOT, MAY GOD BLESS HIM.

    • @runoz2839
      @runoz2839 Před 16 dny +2

      FRFR 🙌 Just a Great Human Being, *PERIODT*

    • @bj6515
      @bj6515 Před 15 dny +1

      For F#*ks sake don't use tRumps Bible.

    • @godlygirls62
      @godlygirls62 Před 15 dny +4

      Don't forget to give Justice Brown her props.
      Yo girl ripped this theory of complete immunity to shreds.

    • @ray-sharp8563
      @ray-sharp8563 Před 15 dny

      He’s also, like Bob Woodward, very much chicken of Trump

    • @runoz2839
      @runoz2839 Před 15 dny +1

      @@ray-sharp8563
      @ least he's
      *NOT* sitting on
      *VITAL INFO* the public
      *NEEDS/NEEDED @ THAT TIME* just to sale books 🤦🙄🤨

  • @hawkes555maine
    @hawkes555maine Před 16 dny +390

    I feel so helpless when the Supreme Court won’t protect us citizens from their own government! 😢

  • @BrattyBetty
    @BrattyBetty Před 16 dny +20

    Anyone with small children knows that whining about imaginary cheating, is the last resort of the sore loser.
    - Senator Elisabeth Warren

  • @emme-7575
    @emme-7575 Před 16 dny +102

    Only a criminal would want “absolute immunity”.

  • @Avalon-tr4vk
    @Avalon-tr4vk Před 16 dny +184

    We are asking this corrupt supreme court to rule on this issue???? F~!

    • @Nothingbutlovehere369
      @Nothingbutlovehere369 Před 16 dny +22

      We didn’t ask. They took it up. After the 3rd Circuit decision. Which is solid.
      Shame shame shame on this Court!

    • @willemvandeursen3105
      @willemvandeursen3105 Před 16 dny

      @Avalon,
      O, yes. And the SC judges will personally carry Trump into the White House, and make sure that the freezers are crammed with the most unhealthy food. As per Emperor's decree.

    • @runoz2839
      @runoz2839 Před 16 dny

      yep 🙄🤦

    • @eclipsehorse8693
      @eclipsehorse8693 Před 15 dny +1

      @@Nothingbutlovehere369 and now it's likely to go back to the lower court for clarification. This is liek bringing your mother a dead bird and she has no idea what it is, so she tells you to go show your grade school teacher in the morning- maybe she knows. Ridiculous!

    • @TomSpeaks-vw1zp
      @TomSpeaks-vw1zp Před 15 dny +2

      @@eclipsehorse8693
      But it may be that the lower courts in this case have more sense. In these days of uncertainty who knows?
      To those of us claiming common sense, this case should have never been heard .
      Have a great day.

  • @robertburghardt-qv5dn
    @robertburghardt-qv5dn Před 16 dny +85

    Why did't they ask if the potus could just get rid of the supreme court ? Or were they afraid to ask that?

    • @warrenspeaks
      @warrenspeaks Před 16 dny +15

      Outstanding comment.

    • @juliewarner1804
      @juliewarner1804 Před 16 dny +7

      Except for Justice Jackson

    • @jackrice2770
      @jackrice2770 Před 16 dny

      In effect the Court's "conservatives" (they're actually right-wing radicals) are saying the POTUS can just ignore the courts.

    • @fumrious
      @fumrious Před 16 dny

      Yup, if he is re-elected by some dark miracle then SCOTUS will be the first to go.

    • @Padq
      @Padq Před 16 dny +6

      Good point. If SC gives Trump immunity, Biden should replace the entire Supreme Court

  • @magicunicorn6535
    @magicunicorn6535 Před 16 dny +31

    Absolute immunity? Nope. But absolute INSANITY? Yes.

  • @George.Q.Citizen
    @George.Q.Citizen Před 16 dny +110

    Article 2 says the President “shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed”, in other words: any UNlawful act would fall outside the bounds of the Office and therefore CANNOT be an OFFICIAL act - i.e., an act falling within the scope and responsibilities of the Office.

    • @stoopidpursun8140
      @stoopidpursun8140 Před 16 dny

      Assassinating a US citizen is an unlawful act. But Obama did exactly that using a drone strike. When will he be prosecuted?

    • @heemlo649
      @heemlo649 Před 16 dny

      I guess police officers are committing the crime of kidnapping when arresting someone.

    • @jackrice2770
      @jackrice2770 Před 16 dny +6

      Oh, you're using logic and textual meaning! That's not how this court works.

    • @e-spy
      @e-spy Před 16 dny +5

      You are right. The insanity of this argument is glaring at us.

    • @t.tenney3470
      @t.tenney3470 Před 16 dny

      We get the "special" Court.

  • @terrylmonk5571
    @terrylmonk5571 Před 16 dny +45

    No one is above the law

  • @jancosmits98
    @jancosmits98 Před 16 dny +386

    If Presidents or ex-Presidents have absolute immunity , then why was Nixon pardoned by President G. Ford ?
    🤔🤔🤔🤔

    • @davidhamm5626
      @davidhamm5626 Před 16 dny +16

      Something to think about....

    • @balrog322
      @balrog322 Před 16 dny

      Quid pro quo, imo. Ford was a reliable GOP hack throughout his career. But your point is well taken. Sans pardon, Nixon was certain to be prosecuted.

    • @eatmorenachos
      @eatmorenachos Před 16 dny +52

      The same reason Nixon accepted that pardon (which is an admission of guilt). Nixon KNEW he'd be charged AND convicted.

    • @jancosmits98
      @jancosmits98 Před 16 dny +27

      @@eatmorenachos which according to Trump's legal team isn't possible , coz Nixon also wasn't impeached .

    • @marlarochelle7405
      @marlarochelle7405 Před 16 dny +7

      Great question

  • @longhaulblue
    @longhaulblue Před 16 dny +32

    I feel sorry for Judge Luttig. Like us he must be dismayed this is even a thing. More so, given his conservative credentials, his deep knowledge of the law, and his obvious love for the Constitution. Like another comment has pointed you, if SCOTUS grants immunity, then it's over for this country.

    • @mikjb
      @mikjb Před 16 dny +4

      Yes but like so many his faith in the system has kept him and many others from seeing what was happening not just in the dark but in broad daylight for decades.
      Finally I saw something about trying to impeach 1 of the justices.
      Talk about a group of people who have been treated like they are above the law.
      There were red flags on many of the justices that got appointed.
      If we loose our democracy it has been a group effort.
      And one of the key reasons is GOP appointed judges

    • @maryprater7693
      @maryprater7693 Před 13 dny

      It is over! This court is corrupt. Most appointed by McConnell who as the senate leader also refused to impeach Trump twice!!

  • @user-ve2gg6yb7s
    @user-ve2gg6yb7s Před 16 dny +40

    Doesn't even matter what the Constitution Says with This supreme. court.

    • @thjbird
      @thjbird Před 16 dny

      They are there to protect Republicans from the constitution

    • @howardcohen6817
      @howardcohen6817 Před 15 dny

      Real "originalists" want to write the constitution as if it never existed (hypothetically speaking, that is).

  • @pcampane99
    @pcampane99 Před 16 dny +26

    Such a sad & pathetic time in our country

  • @Lana-oe3qy
    @Lana-oe3qy Před 16 dny +48

    Judge Ludig would make a good Supreme Court justice.

    • @nonya.bizness
      @nonya.bizness Před 16 dny +1

      he's the og anti-abortion judge.

    • @jimreily7538
      @jimreily7538 Před 12 dny

      Can't be worse than the Trump appointees

    • @nonya.bizness
      @nonya.bizness Před 12 dny

      @@jimreily7538 we deserve scotus justices that are excellent, not people that are least worse.

  • @mdemey2356
    @mdemey2356 Před 16 dny +29

    Thank you Judge Luttig for your wise and measured words.

  • @pcatful
    @pcatful Před 16 dny +107

    We did put a criminal in the oval office in 2016.

    • @mrmark8603
      @mrmark8603 Před 16 dny +5

      The "poorly educated" did.

    • @marshacrishon1548
      @marshacrishon1548 Před 16 dny

      I didn't the people he con did the poorly uneducated and they are so stuck on stupid that they can't see that they are being used

    • @marshacrishon1548
      @marshacrishon1548 Před 16 dny

      And the poorly educated did to they are stuck on stupid to

    • @eclipsehorse8693
      @eclipsehorse8693 Před 15 dny +2

      @@mrmark8603 "well sheee-it we thought we wuz doin good- he told us he's gunna git ridda tyhe mess-icans and build the wawl, and git tuff on chai-na...we though he wuz onna us! He told us stuff we wunted at heer, and he riled us up and made us feel gud about ah-mer-ika...'

    • @charlottesmom
      @charlottesmom Před 15 dny +2

      I sure as 💩didn’t!! My republican mother in law and husband both voted for Hillary so they didn’t….

  • @ianreed9571
    @ianreed9571 Před 16 dny +135

    If SCOTUS grants Presidential immunity, then I think I'll run for President and if I win I'll just deposit $1 trillion from the Treasury into my account and then resign.😂

    • @kenc7120
      @kenc7120 Před 16 dny +2

      You wouldn’t win. Don’t quit your burger flipping job.

    • @swimminginthoughts
      @swimminginthoughts Před 16 dny +2

      The problem with this is that you're going by the media's propaganda version of what immunity means in this case, not what is actually going on.

    • @KristalovesTrump
      @KristalovesTrump Před 16 dny

      Yeah but here's the thing, you've never won a thing in your life. We see you

    • @tlee4218
      @tlee4218 Před 16 dny +22

      Imagine he is making a joke point. It is a good one. Point is this is all BS.
      There is no immunity.

    • @DisaffectedLiberal
      @DisaffectedLiberal Před 16 dny

      @@tlee4218 If there isn't, then dont be angry when pretty much all living former presidents are jailed.

  • @no1nderwhy
    @no1nderwhy Před 16 dny +17

    Im so glad Biden appointed Justice Jackson, she has shown her intellect and righteous disposition places her in upper ranks, among her peers on Supreme Court.

  • @alandonly
    @alandonly Před 16 dny +60

    SCOTUS, tame this man or he will DEVOUR you!

    • @willemvandeursen3105
      @willemvandeursen3105 Před 16 dny +4

      @alandonly,
      "SCOTUS, tame this man or he will DEVOUR you!"
      Jabba the Orange Hut already did.

    • @alinuernberg8399
      @alinuernberg8399 Před 15 dny +2

      SCOTUS tames this man?
      How would that be possible?
      6 of them are puppets and he's their puppeteer!

    • @charlottesmom
      @charlottesmom Před 15 dny +3

      Yup, a dictator has zero use for a Supreme Court.

    • @alandonly
      @alandonly Před 15 dny +2

      @@alinuernberg8399 Correct. Unless they're shrewd and power-hungry enough to know he'll target them soon enough.

    • @donnathomas9111
      @donnathomas9111 Před 15 dny

      He will devour the USA

  • @cpk313
    @cpk313 Před 16 dny +19

    The Supreme Court need to be overhauled

  • @anne-marieparker2137
    @anne-marieparker2137 Před 16 dny +122

    Is Supreme Court going to save democracy or corruption.??

    • @eliassalcedo5229
      @eliassalcedo5229 Před 16 dny +24

      Depends on the vacation packages, they got.

    • @montetanktankkiller700
      @montetanktankkiller700 Před 16 dny +3

      This question is a rhetoric oxymoron.

    • @jdm1657
      @jdm1657 Před 16 dny +9

      God help us if democracy doesn't prevail

    • @sharonwashington9315
      @sharonwashington9315 Před 16 dny +7

      they better or they should be charged with failing to do their job because of their biased actions because trump chose them to be on the bench for his benefit, which trump even said is why he put them there, they owe him BS

    • @janicepalesch9221
      @janicepalesch9221 Před 16 dny

      A few on the S. Ct. are corruption themselves. Corruption always protects corruption.

  • @adamfowler3916
    @adamfowler3916 Před 16 dny +38

    There is no absolute immunity, and in this case, definitely not!

  • @zendragon4037
    @zendragon4037 Před 16 dny +519

    It already was the seat of criminality with Trump in it. That is why we are here.

    • @tulipp1687
      @tulipp1687 Před 16 dny +28

      TOTALLY ABSOLUTELY.. LOVE YOUR COMMENT ❤

    • @brentbarnhart5827
      @brentbarnhart5827 Před 16 dny +18

      FANTASTIC, and TRUE comment. EXACTLY

    • @Redsiix
      @Redsiix Před 16 dny

      waiting for the cultist to jump on this and talk about how bad JB is running everything. If you don't want trump remember how to vote, because he will get all his cultist to vote for him.

    • @JP-qi2tc
      @JP-qi2tc Před 16 dny +14

      You Nailed it!!! Too!!!

    • @frankmalinaro9700
      @frankmalinaro9700 Před 16 dny +10

      Really , they need to keep up ! Thanks .

  • @juliewarner1804
    @juliewarner1804 Před 16 dny +18

    I believe it was Alito who said “I want Abstract! I don’t want the facts!” Are you kidding me??? 😮

  • @princeplanet3288
    @princeplanet3288 Před 16 dny +174

    If the SC gives Trump immunity, it’s all over.

    • @al-bot1094
      @al-bot1094 Před 16 dny

      If they give Trump immunity, they give Biden immunity.
      They can wait until after the election, but Trump can't win.

    • @HendrixFreakazoid
      @HendrixFreakazoid Před 16 dny +7

      Well Donald Trump or Damian Thorn whichever you prefer to call him it's not a coincidence same initials and number of letters because they are one and the same so yeah it's over

    • @Lana-oe3qy
      @Lana-oe3qy Před 16 dny

      No, we can elect a congress that will impeach each of the Supreme Court justices that vote that Trump has immunity.

    • @turdferguson3475
      @turdferguson3475 Před 16 dny +1

      Drama queen much?

    • @theoccidilian4896
      @theoccidilian4896 Před 16 dny

      Right. Maybe 2 years, maybe 20, but it’d be over. Other countries would lose faith, our stabilising force would evaporate, we’d lose the confidence of our allies, and sorry kids, history repeats on a grander scale. End of the world as we know it (and I don’t feel fine).

  • @matrixrevolution2600
    @matrixrevolution2600 Před 16 dny +11

    This shouldn't have to be an issue.
    NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW!

  • @kuzzinsknls992
    @kuzzinsknls992 Před 16 dny +21

    No one is above the law..

  • @barrylenihan8032
    @barrylenihan8032 Před 16 dny +18

    The President on inauguration solemnly swears to faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and to the best of their ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. This solemn oath would be rendered meaningless if the President was granted immunity.

    • @simonmcelrea7231
      @simonmcelrea7231 Před 14 dny

      Sadly, it was rendered meaningless once Donald Trump was elected to office ... but your point is well made!

  • @CCFONESOL
    @CCFONESOL Před 16 dny +8

    There is NO immunity in the constitution for anyone.
    If you remove accountability to the people, you guarantee there will be no obligation to the people.

  • @richyp64
    @richyp64 Před 16 dny +61

    I'm absolutely terrified about the possibility of a bloodbath if he is not convicted. The only way out of this is to vote blue no matter who. 💙💙

    • @edpeterson2293
      @edpeterson2293 Před 16 dny +1

      ❤️TRUMP 2024❤️

    • @d.scottgalloway515
      @d.scottgalloway515 Před 16 dny +2

      @@edpeterson2293BIDEN 2024

    • @CraftyGrandmaDem
      @CraftyGrandmaDem Před 16 dny +1

      This time around the FBI, DOJ and law enforcement all over will be keeping an eye out for violent chatter on-line. They'll know to take it seriously and be prepared. Last time we were caught off guard because that had never happened in America before. Trump purposefully had only a handful of police around and Jan. 6th. Plus, some of his insurrectionists are still in jail. Maybe new ones won't be so willing to go to jail for him.
      Vote Biden/blue save our democracy.

    • @marshacrishon1548
      @marshacrishon1548 Před 16 dny +2

      ​@@edpeterson2293President Joe Biden for 2024 💙💙💙💙 and stinky DJT for prison 2024 😂😂

    • @edpeterson2293
      @edpeterson2293 Před 16 dny

      @@d.scottgalloway515 enjoy your endless wars.

  • @richardwilliams5842
    @richardwilliams5842 Před 16 dny +15

    This was never an issue until this clown came into office, the closest it ever came was with Reagan and the Contra band scandal and even Oliver North knew to take the fall for him SMH

  • @onthetrail3457
    @onthetrail3457 Před 16 dny +21

    I can't believe the Supreme Court agreed to hear this Argument.

    • @jjteacher7482
      @jjteacher7482 Před 16 dny +2

      They are so full of themselves. They think, not only are they above the law, they ARE the law.

    • @maryprater7693
      @maryprater7693 Před 13 dny

      This is not a Supreme Court. It is McConnell's court of subordinates.

  • @teegee9330
    @teegee9330 Před 16 dny +175

    "The Constitution doesn't say who determines if someone committed insurrection so we can't do anything"
    "The Constitution doesn't say anything about presidential immunity so we're going to make up our own law"
    Funny how easily they can go either way depending soley on how it can help Trump.

    • @donaldspaulding6973
      @donaldspaulding6973 Před 16 dny

      That and corruption seem to be the goals of SCOTUS.

    • @KristalovesTrump
      @KristalovesTrump Před 16 dny

      Insurrections are armed and very carefully planned. Read instead of watching TV / pedowood movies

    • @xelamercedes
      @xelamercedes Před 16 dny +19

      Maddening but not funny.

    • @prh129
      @prh129 Před 16 dny +18

      Good point! It shows what a sham this process is - it's certainly not about the law.

    • @BoebertsDentist
      @BoebertsDentist Před 16 dny

      During Trump's second impeachment, his own impeachment lawyer Bruce Castor argued the DOJ could prosecute Trump after he left office.
      He has no immunity - and he, his lawyers, and SCOTUS knows it.
      Innocent people don't claim absolute immunity from prosecution.

  • @robe2504
    @robe2504 Před 16 dny +6

    I wish Judge Luttig was on SCOTUS to keep all those unruly under-educated GOP kids in line.

  • @fredrickmillstead2804
    @fredrickmillstead2804 Před 16 dny +21

    SCOTUS needs to read (or re read) the Constitution.

    • @jameswheeler349
      @jameswheeler349 Před 16 dny +2

      They don't care. They are corrupt.

    • @fredrickmillstead2804
      @fredrickmillstead2804 Před 16 dny +1

      @@jameswheeler349 I believe you are correct sir.

    • @mikjb
      @mikjb Před 16 dny +1

      I think America does.
      We celebrate the 4 of july every year why doesn't that include a little civics like reading the declaration and the constitution.
      Our nation's documents are not that long.

  • @user-kj5td9hd3s
    @user-kj5td9hd3s Před 16 dny +20

    Why don't we just clear out a seat on the supreme court, for Harlan Crow and Leonard Leo, the Russian plants in our govt..

    • @antonomaseapophasis5142
      @antonomaseapophasis5142 Před 16 dny

      I don’t think they are guided by the Russians, but they are useful for the Russians.
      The Leonard Leo network is more a manifestation of the Billionaire Plutocracy.
      The Koch, Thiel, Schwab, Musk, Murdoch, Sachs association.

  • @juliewarner1804
    @juliewarner1804 Před 16 dny +14

    Justice Jackson is the only one with a brain!! ❤

    • @eclipsehorse8693
      @eclipsehorse8693 Před 15 dny +2

      of the none, she felt like she was the only one vested in the argument on that day, and the other 8 were gioing thru the motions for appeanace sake. man if I were on that bench, I'd want to know why i was trying to give a preseident immunity for the acts he committed, and want to hear how they pertain to the case. The other 7-8 justices just didn't seem they were all that into hearing about 'little Donny's fight on the playground'

  • @brendajohnson3173
    @brendajohnson3173 Před 16 dny +14

    “When you are given immunity, that means you probably committed a crime,” Michael Flynn, then an aide on Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, said on Meet the Press in September 2016, the Washington Post reports.

    • @jimreily7538
      @jimreily7538 Před 12 dny

      I don't know much about this Michael Flynnn except those comments you've just posted, but he sounds he was absolutely right, and surely he's a very sensible and rational man. Distinguished, scholarly and erudite, just the sort of man who'd be a sound and sober Presidential advisor.

  • @diegojines-us9pc
    @diegojines-us9pc Před 16 dny +8

    why have a oath of office if you dont have to keep your your oath, simple logic,

  • @EGKaram
    @EGKaram Před 16 dny +16

    Didn't the Washington DC Appellate Court already given her answer with respect to this question? The 57 page document seemed to have been praised by Constitutional experts.
    Judge Luttig should have been on the Supreme Court.

  • @charlesfaure1189
    @charlesfaure1189 Před 16 dny +15

    Presidential Immunity is a direct equivalent of Fuhrerprinzip.

  • @jeanettecarter5438
    @jeanettecarter5438 Před 16 dny +11

    Donald Trump should be in prison

  • @patcomerford5596
    @patcomerford5596 Před 16 dny +5

    Thank you Judge Luttig. ❤

  • @user-mp3sc2sk1m
    @user-mp3sc2sk1m Před 16 dny +4

    Judge LUTTIG is a man who stands by America, the constitution and the rule of law

  • @MarvinBartlett-lj5sh
    @MarvinBartlett-lj5sh Před 16 dny +3

    This man should have been nominated to the Supreme Court. A conservative *with integrity… AND a brain*! I don’t consider myself a conservative, but I demand integrity on SCOTUS.

  • @juliaperriello9394
    @juliaperriello9394 Před 16 dny +8

    Robert’s court is not trust worthy! Shame….

  • @lightwillprevail
    @lightwillprevail Před 16 dny +20

    No more Nixon like behavior and no more Rump's psychotic lying!! 😜 😜

  • @gernblanston5697
    @gernblanston5697 Před 16 dny +20

    I hope Judge Chutkan will accept the challenge from the lawless justices who vote to remand the immunity question in any form to her. She should issue a swift, unapologetic and forceful opinion that the Constitution does not contemplate, much less require, any immunity for a president, former or current, for any crime. She should refuse to make any determination on any charge regarding the official acts, private acts or the ridiculous "periphery" acts formulation. She should force them to go on record as to whether they are authoritarian, political hacks in robes or actual justices of the Supreme Court.

  • @rolandomartinez9076
    @rolandomartinez9076 Před 16 dny +4

    It's only a criminal who knows he is guilty would raise the question of any kind of immunity much less "absolute immunity ".

  • @christinajay8696
    @christinajay8696 Před 16 dny +4

    Judge Luttig I love you you’re a man of truth & honor. I hope and pray all of your work is fruitful 🙏💜

  • @tomd6989
    @tomd6989 Před 16 dny +4

    Thank you, Judge Ludwig! We need honorable people like you on the Supreme Court.

  • @catedney4165
    @catedney4165 Před 16 dny +10

    I wish he was on High Court!!

  • @jessicazellner7336
    @jessicazellner7336 Před 16 dny +7

    I wonder how many times since the creation of SC that their integrity has come into question?
    How do these justices internally justify not adhering to the Constitution?
    How do we not have anything in place for when the SC blatantly snub their noses at conflict of interest and for padding their incomes with gifts? Also, when the SC does not apply the rule of law as stated in constitution, how is that ok and we just plug along like nothing to see here?
    It’s confusing and frightening. Do we even need them if they are not doing their job for the American people and judge like it’s the Wild West?

  • @cherylking1459
    @cherylking1459 Před 16 dny +10

    Dear God, Please help us.

    • @ariaflame-au
      @ariaflame-au Před 16 dny

      I thought he helped those that helped themselves.

  • @maryannlee1491
    @maryannlee1491 Před 16 dny +6

    So sad that the court even took up the case

    • @philipmullins5185
      @philipmullins5185 Před 16 dny

      They took it up because Trump wants delay , delay and more delay because he appears not to be able defend himself against the real evidence against him .

  • @davidhamm5626
    @davidhamm5626 Před 16 dny +4

    Why has it never been needed or used before ?

  • @martinlye2748
    @martinlye2748 Před 16 dny +6

    The Americans have a choice on who they want in power.

  • @jamesaclark9526
    @jamesaclark9526 Před 16 dny +10

    Just saying . Any Republican that wishes to remain in politics after the Spcl. Elections of late oughta consider why they are losing .

  • @pinkpackrat
    @pinkpackrat Před 15 dny +3

    Gotta love Justice Jackson❤❤❤she tells it like it IS‼️

  • @leoroldan3283
    @leoroldan3283 Před 15 dny +3

    The fact that a man who's a clear and present danger, a traitor, a wannabe dictator is allowed to run for president of the USA is just mind-blowing.

  • @brianmckay9976
    @brianmckay9976 Před 15 dny +3

    Justice Jackson - the voice of reason.

  • @tonyscott6837
    @tonyscott6837 Před 16 dny +3

    It would be regrettable for the nation if the Supreme Court Justices were to act inappropriately. The courts should remain impartial and ensure that the laws of the Constitution are upheld. Their primary function is to enforce the law, not to create new laws.

  • @cecilelaforce3686
    @cecilelaforce3686 Před 16 dny +5

    Basically what honorable Judge Luttig is saying, is that Scotus is so far off track they aren't abiding by the US Constitution. And that if he were the judge receiving this remand, maybe he would just send it back to Scotus saying "there is no immunity in the US Constitution -- go fish."

  • @barbaralong8665
    @barbaralong8665 Před 16 dny +4

    Absolute power can result in absolute corruption.

  • @JamesBond7E
    @JamesBond7E Před 16 dny +3

    He is entitled to nothing as he is now a regular citizen

  • @charleslerougetel7350
    @charleslerougetel7350 Před 15 dny +3

    It's absurd that this is the subject of debate. Of COURSE no one should be immune from prosecution...

  • @davidgrochmal6023
    @davidgrochmal6023 Před 16 dny +5

    This kangaroo supreme Court is out of there mind fact!!!

  • @SleepyArcticBirds-ft4lb
    @SleepyArcticBirds-ft4lb Před 16 dny +3

    Judge Jackson👏👏👏👏👏

  • @stevekromas6804
    @stevekromas6804 Před 16 dny +3

    Black women will save us all from MAGA. Vote blue on the whole ticket.

  • @tfatutors
    @tfatutors Před 16 dny +2

    REAL JUDGE LUTTIG!!!

  • @tabo01
    @tabo01 Před 16 dny +2

    Just hearing this case gives it an air of seriousness it actually lacks.

  • @SMS9155
    @SMS9155 Před 16 dny +3

    I truly believe in Karma, and you can bet she's looking right at our Supreme Court justices.

  • @user-li2gs6vk5n
    @user-li2gs6vk5n Před 16 dny +4

    Simple. The Constitution says that States have full control over the elections in each state. Any contact with any state facility or state representative or election worker of any kind it is illegal, no immunity.

  • @jodywho6696
    @jodywho6696 Před 16 dny +1

    Thank you Judge Luttig✨🇺🇸✨💙✨

  • @jodywho6696
    @jodywho6696 Před 16 dny +1

    Thank you Judge Jackson.✨🇺🇸✨💙✨

  • @shurikenmiasma
    @shurikenmiasma Před 16 dny +3

    The equal protections provided by the constitution for State and Federal law should nullify immunity, or provide it to everyone.

  • @Michael-gw8wh
    @Michael-gw8wh Před 16 dny +22

    Funny I’ve never saw abortion in the Constitution either?

    • @swimminginthoughts
      @swimminginthoughts Před 16 dny +1

      Please do not post facts contrary to the Democrat narrative here. Will you delete this or edit it to call Trump a fascist or something?

    • @nnanna1439
      @nnanna1439 Před 16 dny +7

      @@swimminginthoughtsno but Privacy is and a persons body is directly related to their privacy.

    • @DisaffectedLiberal
      @DisaffectedLiberal Před 16 dny +1

      @@nnanna1439 Q: Can you voluntarily have any limbs removed by a surgeon without medical necessity?

    • @BoebertsDentist
      @BoebertsDentist Před 16 dny

      Michael, sugarplum, all males should be forced to get vasectomies and not cause unwanted pregnancies to begin with otherwise mind your business.

    • @nnanna1439
      @nnanna1439 Před 16 dny +1

      @@DisaffectedLiberal not the same but nice try.

  • @edbudzynski729
    @edbudzynski729 Před 4 dny +1

    Justice Jackson, you are absolutely right on. You realize that no one is above the law. Full stop.

  • @NoleDays
    @NoleDays Před 16 dny

    I really love and respect you Justice Jackson!!!

  • @Simo-nk1oq
    @Simo-nk1oq Před 16 dny +7

    It doesn’t mention abortion either.

    • @alij9888
      @alij9888 Před 16 dny +4

      It doesn’t mention cars, computers, or TikTok but here we are.

    • @mackjrbell7828
      @mackjrbell7828 Před 16 dny +3

      It does mention lifetime choices to personal dignity and autonomy central to liberty, which is in the 14th ammendment.

    • @Simo-nk1oq
      @Simo-nk1oq Před 16 dny

      @@mackjrbell7828 But not abortion.

    • @mackjrbell7828
      @mackjrbell7828 Před 16 dny +3

      @@Simo-nk1oq You're not clever, let's not split hairs. It doesn't mention cancer neither but a diagnosis and treatment is still no one's business but the patient and doctor's.

    • @Simo-nk1oq
      @Simo-nk1oq Před 16 dny

      @@mackjrbell7828 There's a HYOOGE difference between cancer and ending a human life.

  • @DebORahDramatica
    @DebORahDramatica Před 16 dny +12

    THE CONSTITUTION DOESN'T MENTION STORMY DANIELS OR MY GIRLFRIEND SYBIL!🤬

    • @ariaflame-au
      @ariaflame-au Před 16 dny

      And he wasn’t the president then anyway

  • @MarJo333
    @MarJo333 Před 16 dny +1

    Of course its come to pass, one of the smartest constitutionalists in history. Judge Luttig is making history. !! Love to see Prof. Tribe more as well...

  • @ianmayes8072
    @ianmayes8072 Před 16 dny +3

    The only thing Trump can really claim is Absolute Imbecility.

  • @davec-1378
    @davec-1378 Před 16 dny +5

    That’s been my point
    The constitution doesn’t mention immunity
    The SCOTUS is supposed to interpret laws in comparison to the constitution
    There is no law giving immunity
    The SCOTUS has nothing to do with this question

  • @debbiedean3165
    @debbiedean3165 Před 16 dny

    Thank you Judge Luttig, I value your opinion so much.
    Thank you Nicole for inviting him back.

  • @martinstannard-pf6dq
    @martinstannard-pf6dq Před 16 dny +4

    At least we can rely on Judge Thomas to base his judgement on objective analysis and not on unwavering...blind allegiance to the man -child....

    • @debvoz
      @debvoz Před 16 dny +4

      in Uncle Thomas's case it isn't loyalty to the man-child it is loyalty to the cash cow

    • @susanhewitt6359
      @susanhewitt6359 Před 16 dny

      You're kidding, right? Clarence Thomas has been corrupt his whole tenure on the SC!

  • @eliassalcedo5229
    @eliassalcedo5229 Před 16 dny +2

    The Supreme Court, delay flavor of the week.

  • @lindamoss4305
    @lindamoss4305 Před 16 dny +1

    It's insanity that the supreme court even are arguing the point of absolute immunity for Trum

  • @roberttaylor3594
    @roberttaylor3594 Před 16 dny +2

    I like how the judge refers to Trump as " the former President'...Trump must hate that!

  • @pauljasmine353
    @pauljasmine353 Před 16 dny +4

    The constitution doesn't mention abortion.

    • @NixonAgnew68
      @NixonAgnew68 Před 16 dny +2

      The Constitution doesn't mention badminton either.

    • @markkozlowski3674
      @markkozlowski3674 Před 16 dny +4

      Nor, surprisingly enough, does it mention television, nuclear weapons, electricity, Islam, political parties, women, etc., etc., etc. And yet it has been applied to disputes involving all these things. It's funny that way.

    • @krimmer66
      @krimmer66 Před 16 dny +2

      it doesn't need to be, at the time of the writing it was legal and women had the right and it was well known to be an issue between the woman and her doctor. Regardless, we amend the constitution to meet our times so Dems know what they now have to do when they have the house and senate back.

    • @pauljasmine353
      @pauljasmine353 Před 16 dny

      @markkozlowski3674
      For the most part, the Supreme Court has done a pretty good job in interpreting the Constitution.

    • @markkozlowski3674
      @markkozlowski3674 Před 16 dny +1

      @@pauljasmine353 It depends who you ask.

  • @DavidJ2222
    @DavidJ2222 Před 16 dny +4

    Thank you president Trump for your great Supreme Court, the greatest gift to America

    • @wolfdreams2000
      @wolfdreams2000 Před 16 dny

      😅😅😅

    • @crowfan100
      @crowfan100 Před 16 dny

      Remember it works both ways, if Trump is Immune, then Biden can stay in office until death and pass the Presidency to Harris. No actions can be taken. Then Biden can go after his enemies like Trump and have him taken out. Fair is fair!

    • @KristalovesTrump
      @KristalovesTrump Před 16 dny

      3 scoops baby!! 🍨

    • @sandrarufus8198
      @sandrarufus8198 Před 16 dny

      trump’s LYING JUSTICES ARE NOT, AMERICA’S GREATEST GIFT!!! TRUELY YOU DO NOT KNOW, HISTORY!!!

  • @ARepublicIfYouCanKeepIt
    @ARepublicIfYouCanKeepIt Před 16 dny +2

    *Exactly!* And the sole remit of the Supreme Court of the United States is to determine whether a law is constitutional, or not. Period.
    If the justices were to weigh in on Trump's absurd motion asserting immunity, rather than sending the case back to the lower court (Which is what Trump wants anyway. Delay. Delay. Delay.), then that would be the very definition of an activist court.
    Congress passes legislation. The President's signature makes legislation the law of the land. The courts enforce the law, with the SCOTUS as the final arbiter of the constitutionality of said laws. The SCOTUS ruling on presidential immunity would be a violation of the separation of powers.
    Now, as to arguments before the court, Justice Brown-Jackson nails it: That, with the knowledge of immunity and protection from prosecution once out of office, a president would be unhindered from making the Oval Office the seat of criminality for the nation.
    There's also been a lot of discussion about official vs. unofficial acts, and that Congress and impeachment are intended to be the final check on presidential misconduct. To be sure, the indictments against Trump are for acts committed as an individual or as a candidate. Not as POTUS. Secondly, what about when a partisan Congress refuses to hold one of their own to account, as was done twice with Trump?
    Lastly, just as privilege never covers criminality, the same goes for immunity. Overt criminal acts can never be covered by either privilege or immunity. At that point, all bets are off. And with DOJ's directive against indicting a sitting president, accountability can only come once presidents are out of office; at which point impeachment is a moot point.
    This is insane!