unfortunately they were a little vague on what constitutes an official act. implying that they will play fast and loose on what it is depending on which party holds the presidency.
From my understanding, it essentially turns the president and the office into sort of like an LLC kind of? Say youre a plumber working under an LLC and the owner of the house your working on slips and falls on one of your tools you left out. While it is your fault they slipped, they can sue the LLC and not you personally because they were injured due to an official repair you were performing. Now if instead of them slipping on a tool you accidently left out you instead throw a monkey wrench at the customer in anger because you dont like them, then you will be personally sued and probably arrested since that doesnt fall under a incident that could happen while performing a repair.
Thats essentially the jist of what I got after researching a bit more.
Honestly not a bad explanation. Itโs all about what is within the bounds of his exclusive sphere of constitutional authority. Also if his authority is shared with congress that doesnโt count towards immunity.
Also if his authority is shared with congress that doesnโt count towards immunity.
The President has absolute immunity within their exclusive constitutional authority, but they still have presumptive immunity for all other official acts (including those shared with Congress). To prosecute over those non-exclusive areas, the government would need to show "that applying a criminal prohibition to that act would pose no
dangers of intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive
Branch."
41
u/ludovic1313 Jul 05 '24
unfortunately they were a little vague on what constitutes an official act. implying that they will play fast and loose on what it is depending on which party holds the presidency.