No. of Recommendations: 4
Again, it's the distinction you provided. If the President offered to grant a pardon in exchange for the murdering of a political rival, the actus rea of the crime would be the conspiracy to commit murder. The President is immune from being prosecuted for granting a pardon, but he isn't immune from entering into an agreement for a murder to be committed. Because arranging for someone to be murdered isn't an official act of the President - it's not something he's legally allowed to do.
So, pray tell, if criminal activity is illegal, why didn’t the SCOTUS just say that? Instead, they went out of their way to say there is immunity for official acts.
Three of the Supreme Court Justices, and many Constitutional experts, think this ruling allows criminal activity to occur with immunity, which will threaten our republic.
Apparently, there are some people above the law, including the SCOTUS.
