Timeline for Does Justice Sotomayor's "Seal Team 6" example, in and of itself, explicitly give the President the authority to execute opponents? If not, why not?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 3 at 14:39 | comment | added | Barmar | @spacetyper OTOH, the fact that it's published along with the majority opinion doesn't necessarily make it a true representation of what they intended. It's just another interpretation of the ruling. Trump's lawyer was interviewed this morning, he said there are other checks and balances that would prevent the SEAL Team scenario. | |
| Jul 3 at 6:16 | comment | added | spacetyper | The fact that it's a dissent has no bearing on it's logical consistency with the majority's opinion, so while dissents in of themselves have no privileged interpretation, that's a moot point when the majority's opinion makes clear that constitutional rights of presidents are immune to the law. | |
| Jul 2 at 21:04 | comment | added | Michael | Thank you, this is exactly the information I was looking for | |
| Jul 2 at 21:03 | vote | accept | Michael | ||
| Jul 2 at 20:56 | comment | added | Barmar | This is how I see it as well. Traditionally, Justices aren't allowed to write publicly during their term about cases, except in their opinion papers. So this is the dissenting justices' soapbox. | |
| Jul 2 at 20:54 | history | answered | Nate Eldredge | CC BY-SA 4.0 |