Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In December 2024, in the thread "Re: BRK: Why Not XOM?", BreckHutHigh asked the members: "What about the long road trips with kids?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (22) |
Author: albaby1 SILVER
SHREWD
  😊 😞

Number: of 84364 
Subject: Re: Twenty Weeks to Topple a Republic
Date: 07/01/24 5:37 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 2
OK, would you please give me a scenario or two where an official act of the president would be criminal?

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.

This isn't some far out, crazy, completely novel concept. U.S. Congressmen enjoy absolute immunity - civil and criminal - for their votes and speech in their respective Congressional chambers. That's not under dispute, because unlike the Presidential case the Constitution explicitly grants them that immunity in the Speech and Debate Clause. So as you might expect, the courts have had to deal with the scope of that immunity in the context of allegations that Congressmen were bribed to vote or speak in a certain way:

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/383/16...

It doesn't shield them from criminal charges absolutely. If a Congresscritter agreed to give a speech or take a vote in exchange for a hit on a political rival, they'd still be prosecutable for conspiracy to commit murder. It's just that the speech or vote cannot on its own be the "actus rea" (the unlawful act) that supports the crime. The elements of the crime have to be met with things other than the vote or speech.

Again, many countries have this sort of criminal immunity for legislators - either for when they're doing the legislative things (like in the U.S., and in virtually every Westminster parliamentary system), and sometimes more broadly (as in France or Germany, where legislators enjoy not just immunity in their legislative functions but in other conduct as well). These countries have not been wracked by crime waves of legislators assassinating their election rivals in exchange for votes...
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to albaby1 here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 84,309 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:
It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025
G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026
Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026
HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025
Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (22) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community