4.26.24 – C&C News 

“U. S. Supreme Court Justices vs. Absolute Immunity”

By Jeff Childers, Practicing attorney, well-known author

Excerpts from this article:

☕️ BAD LUCK Friday, April 26, 2024 C&C NEWS 🦠 (coffeeandcovid.com)

I’d like to briefly point out a few things that exasperate me about the discussion of presidential immunity. 

I’m only a commercial litigation attorney, not a constitutional scholar, and nobody listens to me;
but during the entire two hours of oral argument and hundreds of probing Supreme Court questions, it struck me the Justices were largely missing the point.

All nine Justices, including the liberals, seemed shocked by the concept of

Like me, you’ve probably heard the media’s vomitous, broken-record jargon until your ears were bleeding: “Nobody is above the law.” Really? Is that true?

Let’s start with judges. 

f a judge makes a mistake, and an innocent person goes to the electric chair, what happens?

Even if the judge 
intentionally railroaded the defendant because of racial bias or for any other reason, what happensNothing.

How about Congressmen? 

If they start a war that gets thousands of Americans killed, for illegal reasons…what happens?

(Critics will yap about bribery. So what? How many successful prosecutions have there been?
At best, which is a stretch, bribery prosecutions only show a limited exception to Congress’ broad, general immunity.)


City Commissioners are immune. 

What if a city commissioner violates citizens’ constitutional rights in Florida by mandating vaccines, and an outraged lawyer (me) proves the constitutional violation in court? What happens to the Commissioners?


How about COPS? 

Cops are immune

At least, they enjoy 
qualified immunity. 

What happens if a cop negligently mows down grandma while chasing a teenaged jaywalker at irrationally high speeds?
Nothing. Immune.

For Heaven’s sake, the ENTIRE GOVERNMENT is immune. 

It’s a concept called 
sovereign immunity. 

The only way ‘round sovereign immunity is when the government graciously de-immunizes itself by passing a law allowing certain types of claims against government officials

Although his [a President] immunity produces extremely vexing results in many cases, it is just as necessary as other types of government immunity. 

The President is not even an ordinary government official. 


Article II of the Constitution establishes the President as the Executive Branch. 

Under the Constitution, the President enjoys powers exceeding those of any other government official, so it seems uncontroversial that he would also enjoy immunity exceeding that of any other government official.

I mean, through his pardon power, the President can even dish out immunity to anybody else
, for any crime, no matter how horrible, even mislabeling checks

Why not himself?

Would I love to see Barack Hussein Obama tried for his crimes? A hundred percent. 

But that would open Pandora’s immunity box and start the political prosecution train going. Next stop, Banana Republic.

What to me was unaccountably absent from yesterday’s oral arguments was any discussion about the mountain of broad immunities already enjoyed by government and whether the President’s immunity should rest somewhere near, if not right at, the peak.

In other words, at minimum, a president should never have less immunity than every other government official. 

We put up with immunity so judges can rule without fearing personal consequences. 

We want Presidents to execute their duties boldly and decisively.

Nobody [U. S. Supreme Court Justices] made that point yesterday.

What can I tell you? It’s a super strange year.