At least we once had a government that knew the President had no such immunity when Nixon was pardoned.

Justice delayed is justice denied

The Supreme Court has caused major grief to this case by sitting on it like fools

Power corrupts the weak. The President has the most power in our country why would we allow them to be immune from their actions? If anything they should be held to the highest standard. With great power comes great responsibility.

Sotomayor’s comment on presidential immunity with regard to an impeachment was quite strong. She implies that If the president has immunity and thus exempt from crimes, then the president could not be impeached because he would be exempt from all “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

If you can not follow the law you should not be president

The ONLY reason to hear this at all is to delay Trump's trials and obstruct justice on his behalf.

Oh BS this sht should of NEVER came before the Court.

It's unreal that we are having this conversation. EVERY president is a person like everyone else and we are ALL accountable for criminal activity. Period. Why is this so hard to grasp? Anyone who thinks the president should have immunity is not interested in freedom or what it means to be an American.

During my life, it has always been clear, NO one is above the law. Even Nixon understood this concept. A crime is a crime. And anyone should have to answer for their criminal acts. Period. Full Stop.

A country who seriously is contemplating whether a president should be able to indulge in (some types of) criminal behavior - without any possibility of accountability - is on a steep downwards slope. No one should be given the right to do criminal acts - without legal consequences.

Presidents should NOT HAVE IMMUNITY For ACTS TO SUBVERT THE PEACEFUL TRANSFER OF POWER. No immunity for acts to overthrow the government and become a dictator No immunity for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Why have a Supreme Court if they can not rule in a timely manner.

This court is some bull💩

"Trump v. United States" .. really says it all.

A President but not a king.

It's almost as if these justices aren't old enough to remember Nixon and WaterGate. It's unfathomable that this would be such a DIFFICULT decision for them when any average citizen with basic common sense could make that call.

FROM FRANCE: World Democracy in the hands of the Supreme Court... some of whose members do not inspire confidence. Will they be courageous, simply honest?

They are making this too complicated "Was a crime committed by a president?" is sufficient.

Absolute immunity? Does this mean that the president can basically do whatever he wants while in office, knowing that he's immune from prosecution? Insane!

Give presidents absolute immunity and then hand over the ruling to President Biden together with a Postit note of the number to call for Seal Team 6...

The concept of absolutism in the U.S. died 350 years ago. The founding fathers wanted no kings, and the capability for one's rulers to face charges for crimes they committed is inherently a part of this rejection of absolute immunity.

Easy: We the people do not have immunity therefore the president does not have immunity.

Sauer is in over his head. His argument is DOA.

It is important to acknowledge that no individual possesses absolute immunity, including the President of the United States of America. Our nation is not a dictatorship, which is one of the reasons we gained independence from Britain.

SCOTUS can take all the time they need. Years if need be. In the meantime, let Trump go to trial and be judged.

It is a sickness that this is even being discussed. SCOTUS is demanding to determine if pigs can really fly by hearing from aviation experts. 😂

Presidential Immunity would give the President more power than an evil man should have or a decent man should want. 😑⚖️🇺🇸

supreme court better get it right ✅️ NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW!!

Dragging their heels. While we are at it, could we please place limits for service on these judges?

Don't give this an inch, no immunity!

Why don't they just tear up the Constitution

i like how the basic reasons that america was founded is under question now even though we all learned this in the 4th grade

Can we get this over with? Hasn't America suffered enough? The GOP has dug itself into such a deep hole over the last 7-8 years and they just keep digging. My former party is unsavable at this point, and it will take at least a generation to overcome. Quite possibly two generations.

If they rule him immune, they should grant EVERY PRISONER a release in the USA. Every ticket, ruling, child support, weed charge... GONE! *HANDCLAP*

its called "Checks and Balances" The constitutional convention wrote that into the constitution. the President can be held accountable for their actions as president. both private and public

If you make your president totally immune, you free yanks will have a king again. 😂😂😂😂😂. Why? LOL because you allow politicians to appoint judges. Well done you.

No immunity. Break the law pay up. Presidents, as examples, are held to the highest standard. Not the lowest! For crying out loud!

What a crock! Nine co-conspiritors.😡

No immunity for him or anyone.

They should provide judgement on Trump, not ducking saying this would apply to all future presidents. Trump was not a typical President.

We should be able to fix everything. But we can't fix anything.

The decision that the Supreme Court must make here affects not only the USA but also has implications for the entire world. Nothing less than democracy and its values are at stake. I sincerely hope they are aware of this.

The court is trying to deal with immunity for a former irrational president. Trump geared the presidential office for himself

No one is above the law! Not even former or sitting president.

What's with the voice problem This guy and Kennedy has voices difficult to listen to speak.

Kim Jong Trump

They shouldn't have taken this case at all, we are not practicing autocracy, and dictatorship.

The Grifter Court should not even be debating this. Embarrassing.

There is nothing presidential about this man. He is already being held to a different standard because anyone else would be jailed by now. Where is the line???? It keeps moving and it's not ok!!

I think it’s a simple question: Do we want a president that swears to uphold the constitution and follows the laws of the land or do we want a dictator that creates a global crime syndicate?

A nation's Supreme Court must be completely impartial and reflect the overall aspirations and general will of the majority of that nation's people and not the will and aspirations of those who appointed them to their position! Also, Here in Australia, judges and magistrates are not political appointees and must retire at age 70...

Too many breaks for the ex- president already

Please president Biden nominate more democratic judges to the scotus to equal out the right wing partisanship

I didn't watch it all but I did hear Neal Katyal basically say this case is silly. As a taxpayer I think SCOTUS should have stopped this and just leave it to the Appellate Court. Now more delays.

NONE! No Criminal immunity! But the conservatives and the chief justice did their best at delaying the trial(s).

The real problem here is that our forefathers wrote our laws with the assumption that our presidents would have the maturity of an adult. Unfortunately, Donald Trump's presidency did not rise to that given assumption.

This is not a difficult case. Presidents should not have absolute presidential immunity for criminal activity.

"Did I understand you to say... if [the president] makes a mistake... He's subject to the criminal laws just like anybody else?" Justice Samuel Alito asked. "You don't think he's in a special, peculiarly precarious position?" he continued. Mr Dreeben responded that "making a mistake" would not land someone under criminal prosecution. I would add '' ask Kavanaugh siting next to you''

Dude needs to clear his throat! I could not listen to that

An official criminal act is still a criminal act.

This immunity stuff is atrocious!! No one in this country is above the law.

Private criminal activity is sooooo different than on the job 🥴. What the Hell is so hard in this?!?!?

Such bs.

Beautifully done Lana.

I think they'll place it on congress. You need an act of congress to break down the line of immunity vs. no immunity

Is it REALLY that difficult??? No elected person has absolute immunity for acts, in their personal or professional life. The person elected to the highest office should be a person of the highest integrity. If a President and their advisors feel that a decision may be ‘illegal’… THEY are the lawmakers and should change the law… this can happen quickly and in times of crisis or, for example, War. The President or indeed ANY elected official should uphold the law of the land at all times. Period.

Please- set a precedent for a predator ex president

They were not 'struggling' They were FLOUNDERING. #cowards.

THIS SNAKE IS GOING TO GET AWAY WITH IT... GOD HELP US ALL......................

No one is above the law in a democratic country.

Shameless conservative religious zealots of the highest court.

No send it back to Appels court

Ben Franklin wasn’t a lawmaker, nor a judge.

Sauer is wrong and extremely hard to listen to! Just nuts!

Brown-Jackson got it the most right - the risk of an unconstrained president is far greater than putting constraints on the president that can be adjusted over time. For this case it seems to me that the arguments should be heard at trial and the appellate process can make appropriate corrections. The justices are putting the horse before the cart.

How completely unimpressed I am by the drivel flowing in this court. The essence of sophomoronic. Nothing *supreme* at all. A cataclysmic failure in slow motion.

What makes him think he deserves immunity? Nixon was not granted any immunity. !

L'etat c'est moi. Haven't these judges ever taken a history class?

totally disagree with jessica's analysis. scotus absolutely does NOT need to decide the entire scope of how the whole concept of immunity will apply to all future presidents. it became very clear over the course of the hearing that the issues presented in this case can- and must- be decided without trying to do the impossible by trying to nail down a rule that would work for all future cases of presidential immunity.

Trump is just beyond ridiculous.

The question if a president has immunity, can do what he wants, is absurd. It's merely brought up to delay Trump's many court cases until after the elections.

There is so much bull crap with the stupid issue on immunity. Will someone in his right mind after seeing what this traitor is capable of would seriously in their f ing mind give him immunity? Definitely, the END is near.

Why aren’t they showing the Supreme Court the computer analysis? The errors and taking way longer than it should to count votes? Why did they let them keep counting and why was there more voters than registered voters? Why did they find people deceased for years votes?

Trumpy thinks he can do no wrong

CHUMP FOR PRISON 2024 🇺🇸

We Americans don’t have time to ponder this matter now 😢we need to unlock our lower Courts

It's about public property and private property rights.

The conditional is whether the president is a Republican or not. If yes, there is immunity. If not, straight to jail.

That whole Seal Team 6 assassination stuff is stupid. Even the Supreme Court felt that that was a reach. You could tell on the way that they were asking the questions and discussing it. Nobody in their right mind takes that as a possibility

If only Eric Mays were here. POINT OF ORDER!!!

Here is the deal ... there shouldn't be absolute immunity regardless whether official or private acts. If say he has immunity w/ official acts then we could well have a president that commits war crimes w/ impunity. That is ridiculous. That is no better than a dictator.

Suppream court shouldn't even been in this

The case could still get going shortly after the election. There are about two months between the election and the ballot certification, and then another couple of weeks before inauguration. What happens if Trump wins, but is in the midst of such a momentous trial, or even awaiting sentencing?

Lock him up,vote blue

Managed democracy

You think the Supreme Court could make better use of their time

As a foreigner, from a nation where the executive branch powers and limits seems to be way more specified in laws (written about 100-50 years ago, may I recommend that someone takes a look at other democratic nations laws in this matter… Not to “cut and paste”, but as a map showing what routes can be taken in different types of executive acts. I suppose many democracies have already “stolen” ideas from the US Constitution, so no one would be upset 🙂. I doubt individual laws are copyrighted. It seems like the US has been successful in managing without having such specified laws for 250 years. Possibly thanks to an idea that the POTUS and other politicians are supposed to be gentlemen. Great! But from my perspective it seems like that now is something of the past. And I would assume there either has to be a massive work for the SCOTUS to accomplish, or-as in the case of the <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="843">14:3</a> amendment-the SCOTUS refers it to the lawmakers to make laws regulating the POTUS limits. But would either the SCOTUS or Congress have a Constitutional right to limit another branch of the Government? Alternatively must the POTUS then regulate the boundaries of his own powers? Or perhaps the three branches of Government will have to sit down and together figure this out in an unanimous way? Or perhaps an idea is to resolve only the specific instances of immunity this case is about. Then hope that the POTUSes of the future are gentlemen/-ladies, and resolve other Presidential immunity issues when and if they arise? Although I understand this is quite an annoying issue, it is rather interesting to see how such Constitutional work will play out. And I hope it will be a relatively smooth process. But again… some democracies seem to have figured much of this out already. Although the executive branch is then often selected by (and among) the lawmakers, and hence has less power on its own.

We need a whole new court

Immunity in Chutkan trial is the question that needs answering. That's all 2024 voters need to know right now. If justices need some bravo answer to an all and forever one has to wonder about their egos.