• barrbaric [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    6 days ago

    IIRC that was for “official duties” of the office of the president or somesuch, they could just argue that these weren’t official duties. Really the SC can just say whatever they want as an excuse.

    • hotspur@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 days ago

      Ostensibly yes, but I feel like the way the ruling was built—virtually anything they did, from taking a shit to ordering the hit on their grade school bully would fall under their “official duties” and you also weren’t allowed to use any communications from any of their staffers, etc. I just remember that it was basically a blanket immunity, once you factored in the burden of arguing the case.

      That said, of course they will apply a different standard/ignore whatever they want. I’m still thinking it won’t go farther than performative statements and social media, but they’re so whacky that it’s almost impossible to make proper predictions about anything.