General Discussion

intrepidity

(7,891 posts) Wed Nov 20, 2024, 11:37 AM 19 hrs ago

What, exactly, would an "illegal order" look like?

Since SCOTUS has declared that *everything* POTUS does while acting in the role of POTUS cannot later be adjudicated (ergo, is de facto "legal" ) then what, pray tell, would an "illegal order" look like?

"If the president does it, it is not illegal."

So what are these "illegal orders" that some are expecting/hoping military command will resist?

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What, exactly, would an "illegal order" look like? (Original Post) intrepidity 19 hrs ago OP

Don't think the "immunity" ruling means that. If trump say ordered Medicare ended, he would be prevented from doing that Silent Type 19 hrs ago #1

What, exactly, would an "illegal order" look like? Example: Live fire on peaceful protestors. speak easy 18 hrs ago #2

Easy, the President has immunity for giving an illegal order (according to some) sarisataka 18 hrs ago #3

There's the answer to this question... Hugin 18 hrs ago #4

Silent Type

(6,652 posts)

1. Don't think the "immunity" ruling means that. If trump say ordered Medicare ended, he would be prevented from doing that

Reply to intrepidity (Original post)

Wed Nov 20, 2024, 11:43 AM

19 hrs ago

unless Congress passes such laws. That's not likely to happen since even GOPers aren't going to pick up mom's or grandparents' medical costs.

speak easy

(10,503 posts)

2. What, exactly, would an "illegal order" look like? Example: Live fire on peaceful protestors.

Reply to intrepidity (Original post)

Wed Nov 20, 2024, 12:19 PM

18 hrs ago

sarisataka

(20,983 posts)

3. Easy, the President has immunity for giving an illegal order (according to some)

Reply to intrepidity (Original post)

Wed Nov 20, 2024, 12:23 PM

18 hrs ago

The people carrying out said order do not have immunity for any actions they take. Therefore any order which would subject the person to criminal charges under US law or crimes against humanity is "illegal".

There were some big trials in Europe back in 1945-46 that established "I was just following orders" is not a valid defense to criminal charges.

Hugin

(34,565 posts)

4. There's the answer to this question...

Reply to sarisataka (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 20, 2024, 12:34 PM

18 hrs ago

And also the key to why Trump is nominating empty suits with baggage and a phone number. They WILL try to implement his bidding. However, the successful implementation of his scheme depends on enough below them not being clear on their own liabilities and responsibilities.

If the people who actually make things happen are clear on who they truly represent, then Trump is a turtle on a post.

Reply to this discussion