Ariel Roblin: Why the Supreme Court's presidential immunity decision is so concerning
It's very rare for someone to have incredible power, no accountability, and be trusted to make all the right choices for the good of the people.
It's very rare for someone to have incredible power, no accountability, and be trusted to make all the right choices for the good of the people.
It's very rare for someone to have incredible power, no accountability, and be trusted to make all the right choices for the good of the people.
As we reflect on the Fourth of July weekend, we think back to our founding fathers' ideas nearly 250 years ago.
They had a vision for the country they were creating and the monarchy they wanted to leave behind.
The Supreme Court's decision to grant U.S. presidents absolute immunity for core official acts will have implications long after the 2024 presidential election.
With passionate viewers on both sides of the aisle, we felt we needed to have a conversation about why this decision is concerning.
The Supreme Court is making decisions for the longevity and the health of our nation.
Power is a problem when it's unchecked because power is addictive and can be justified through any leader's personal beliefs.
The editorial board and I can't think of any president, past or present, that we would feel comfortable with this type of unchecked power.
It's very rare for someone to have incredible power, no accountability, and be trusted to make all the right choices for the good of the people.
Look, both sides have contributed to a divisive environment, but we can't make decisions for just current times.
Safeguarding our democracy is foundational to the responsibility of the court.
Our founding fathers certainly weren't perfect, but they cared about what America would be like in 250 years.
Ariel Roblin is the president and general manager of KCRA 3 and My58. See more of her editorials here.