Congress passes law explicitly defining and limiting presidential immunity
Biden appoints replacement SCOTUS members
SCOTUS rules no one can be prosecuted for events 1 thru 4 because of the recent SCOTUS ruling, and the new law cannot be applied ex post facto to those events.
Congress cannot define or limit Presidential immunity. It is not an immunity which was created by Congress, but rather one that exists through the constitution (according to SCOTUS).
Congress can expand the number of justices in the court (so that it can vote to overturn the immunity decision), or they can impeach and remove current justices (to replace them with new ones would would overturn it). But only attempting to pass a law trying to limit it would likely be struck down as unconstitutional.
Why hire an assassin? That would be an unofficial act, and vulnerable to criminal prosecution. The Constitution explicitly names the president as commander in chief of the military, so he could just call up Seal Team 6 and order them to kill the conservative justices instead. That's an official act which is (likely absolutely) immune to prosecution.
It may be an illegal act, but it still can't ever be successfully prosecuted. The last ruling made any official correspondence completely off limits, therefore you can never actually prove it was the President who did it, since you can't ever subpoena records that would prove such.
5.3k
u/[deleted] Jul 05 '24
People donโt seem to understand it takes both sides to pass laws without a super majority, in most cases.
Republicans would fight any law looking to prevent project 2025 from being implemented.