Constitutional Law, Free Speech, Politics

No, President Biden, the Supreme Court Did Not Remove All Limits on the Presidency
President Joe Biden delivered an address from the White House last night on the presidential immunity decision by the Supreme Court. While pledging that he will defend the rule of law, President Biden misrepresented what that law is in the aftermath of Trump v. United States. While we have often discussed false constitutional claims by the President as well as other false statements, an address of this kind is particularly concerning in misleading citizens on the meaning of one of the most important decisions in history.

 

As I have previously written, I am not someone who has favored expansive presidential powers. As a Madisonian scholar, I favor Congress in most disputes with presidents. However, I saw good-faith arguments on both sides of this case and the Court adopted a middle road on immunity — rejecting the extreme positions of both the Trump team and the lower court.

One of the most glaring moments in the address came when President Biden declared that “for all…for all practical purposes, today’s decision almost certainly means that there are virtually no limits on what a president can do.”

That is not true.

The Court found that there was absolute immunity for actions that fall within their “exclusive sphere of constitutional authority” while they enjoy presumptive immunity for other official acts. They do not enjoy immunity for unofficial, or private, actions.

The Court has often adopted tiered approaches in balancing the powers of the branches. For example, in his famous concurrence to Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952), Justice Robert Jackson broke down the line of authority between Congress and the White House into three groups where the President is acting with express or implied authority from Congress; where Congress is silent (“the zone of twilight” area); and where the President is acting in defiance of Congress.

Here the Court separated cases into actions taken in core areas of executive authority, official actions taken outside those core areas, and unofficial actions.  Actions deemed personal or unofficial are not protected under this ruling.

It is certainly true that the case affords considerable immunity, including for conversations with subordinates. However, this did not spring suddenly from the head Zeus. As Chief Justice John Roberts lays out in the majority opinion, there has long been robust protections afforded to presidents.

There are also a host of checks and balances on executive authority in our constitutional system. This includes judicial intervention to prevent violations of the law as well as impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors.

President Biden’s hyper-ventilated response is crushingly ironic. He was vice president when President Barack Obama killed an American citizen without a trial or a charge. When former Attorney General Eric Holder announced the “kill list” policy (that included the right to kill any American citizen), he was met with applause, not condemnation.

The Obama-Biden administration then fought every effort by the family to sue the government. President Biden would have been outraged by any attempt of a Republican district attorney to charge him or President Obama with murder.

He would also be outraged by prosecutors pursuing criminal charges for the deaths associated with the deluge of undocumented persons over the Southern border.

In his address, President Biden also claimed that “the law would no longer” define “the limits of the presidency.”

That is also untrue. This case was remanded for the purpose of defining what of these functions would be deemed private as opposed to official. Even on official actions, former president Donald Trump could be prosecuted if the presumptive immunity is rebutted by prosecutors.

What was most glaring for many civil libertarians was President Biden’s portrayal of himself as a paragon of constitutional fealty.  He declared that “I know I will respect the limits of the presidential powers as I have for the last three-and-a-half years.”

That was also untrue. President Biden has racked up an impressive array of losses in federal courts where he was found to have violated the constitution.

This includes rulings that his administration has exceeded his authority and engaged in racial discrimination in federal programs. Indeed, Biden has often displayed a cavalier attitude toward such violations.

For example, the Biden administration was found to have violated the Constitution in its imposition of a nationwide eviction moratorium through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).  Biden admitted that his White House counsel and most legal experts told him the move was unconstitutional. But he ignored their advice and went with that of Harvard University Professor Laurence Tribe, the one person who would tell him what he wanted to hear. It was, of course, then quickly found to be unconstitutional.

Biden showed the same disregard over the unconstitutionality of his effort to unilaterally forgive roughly half a trillion dollars in student debt. Courts have already enjoined that effort as presumptively unconstitutional (though an appellate court in one of those cases relaxed aspects of the injunction).

The address was used to reinforce his “democracy is on the ballot” campaign theme. Pundits have repeated the mantra, claiming that if Biden is not elected, American democracy will perish.

While some of us have challenged these predictions, the other presidential candidates are missing a far more compelling argument going into this election. While democracy is not on the ballot this election, free speech is.

For many of us in the free speech community, President Biden has become the most anti-free speech president since John Adams. As discussed in my new book,  “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” the Biden Administration has helped fund and maintain an unprecedented censorship system in the United States.

That record is hardly supportive for a president claiming to be the defender, if not the savior, of the Constitution.

 

448 thoughts on “No, President Biden, the Supreme Court Did Not Remove All Limits on the Presidency”

  1. Trump Attorney:

    Fake Electors Covered By Immunity

    An attorney for former President Trump suggested the so-called “fake electors” scheme qualifies as an “official act,” which would prevent it from being prosecuted under the recent Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity.

    Trump attorney Will Scharf told CNN Monday night that some acts alleged in the former president’s federal election subversion indictment do constitute private conduct but the effort to put forth slates of alternate electors in 2020 from key battleground states is not one of them.

    We believe the assembly of those alternate slates of electors was an official act of the presidency,” Scharf said, noting the Supreme Court left that question for lower courts to decide.

    On that point, Justice Amy Coney Barrett broke with the majority, which she otherwise signed on to, writing that she sees “no plausible argument for barring prosecution of that alleged conduct.”

    https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4751339-donald-trump-attorney-fake-electors-scheme-official-act-immunity-decision/

    1. Jeff says:July 2, 2024 at 12:36 PM
      Honestly, Elvis Bug

      After the last two weeks you’ve had, no one could blame you for tying one on tonight.

      1. This TRASH website is full of TRASH like this TRASH PUPPET WATCH GARBAGE

    2. Were they fake electors when the Democrats employed the same tactics? There was rampant voter fraud in Georgia a fact, the mail in ballot process was initiated without legislative approval, 51 Intelligence dikheads putforth a letter lending credibility to the lie that Crackheads laptop was Russian disinformation. Trump had every right to believe the election was stolen, it was!

      2. Hawaii 1960
        Although some considered it a nonsensical move, the facts of election fraud in Georgia alone now make it a bit more plausible. Empirical data doesn’t lie, just like bank accounts!

  2. PUPPET WATCH

    Column: “No President Biden–

    Tuesday, July 2, 11:40 EST

    Interestingly, our usually ubiquitous puppets, Floyd and Estovir, are absent so far. Traveler too is absent; while Waters has only 2 posts.

    But like yesterday, green anonymous is the vehicle for all the Floyd-Estovir posts; those nasty, name-calling comments that presume to speak for all puppets.

    The morning Greek chorus bots have reappeared today after being mostly absent yesterday. It’s funny how this group reshuffles every morning.

    Here’s how the breakdown looks for established puppets as of 11:40 Eastern Time with total comments next to name.

    Margot Ballhere: 1
    GEB: 4
    GioCon: 1
    Hullbobby: 5
    James: 1
    Jeff: 1
    Edward Mahl: 3
    Oldmanfromkansas: 4
    Number 6: 1
    Sam: 2
    SpeakUp: 2
    Upstate Farmer:
    Whimsical Mama: 1
    Wise Old Lawyer: 1
    Waters: 2
    ZZDoc: 3

    Old Man From Kansas sounds halfway moderate more often than not. But every now and then his language is pure Estovir. We’ve noticed this dichotomy for 2 years at this point.

    Morning Greek Chorus Bots

    Rico, Radical Pragmatist, BTBoe, Eliot Vizel, Starlite, Marneydavide, Sw960vvw, Vincente, Whig98, Steven Walser, JJC, Whalefarms2025.

    NOTE:

    Yesterday’s watch list for the column, “Too Clever By Half– was first posted at 7:22 pm EST. Within 10 minutes, the troll farm responded with a barrage of nuisance posts to create vast distance. That list was then re-posted later in the evening and triggered an all out attempt to crash the blog with ‘miles’ of garbled text. ..Let’s see if that happens again.

    3. Odd that a guy that goes by ANONYMOUS would be the person MAKING A LIST. Get a life you little impotent fascist.

      1. HullBobby,
        As you know I use the “Recent comments” feature on the good professor’s blog to get to the good comments by good people like you.
        I did have to go back and read about your “MAKING A LIST,” comment.
        Wow. What a pathetic person. Real loser. Get a life is right.

    4. Sincerely sir, I am one of the liberal commenters, and we would appreciate it if you would find somewhere else to play.

      You just admitted that you are the reason for the disruption here. In fact, you seemed proud of it last night.

  3. Unintended consequences

    Harry Reid would be proud

    It now appears that the DC case has walked all over braggs goal of sentencing Trump before the election

    LMAO

    And trumps lawyers are the idiots. Riiiiiight

  4. Dear Mr. Turley, for years, Democrats have used the courts to issue an injunction against a law or regulation they didn’t like. They go throughout the country looking for judges who are sympathetic to the cause they are currently upset about. The fact that the Supreme Court did not fulfill all of their demands regarding President Trump has sent these sad folks into a tailspin. The face of the Democratic Socialist wing, A. Cortez, has made a new threat towards the Justices; she states she will bring forth the idea of impeaching the 6 who voted in partial favor of President Trump. I would hope someone would tell this Communist, that it is wrong to use political power and the law to attack political enemies. The Democrats have very successful in this abuse of the Judicial System. Calling for the impeachment of the
    Conservative members of the Supreme Court is a bridge too far.

  6. Once again, Soviet Democrats demand we believe Joe Biden instead of our lying eyes. After all, The Big Guy just finished telling Americans after the debate that he knows how to tell the truth.

    Proud Lyin’ Biden, once again – this time straight from the dissenting opinions of the racist Wise Latina Woman Justice Sotomayor and the Questioning Birthing Person Justice Jackson to The Big Guy’s lyin’ lips. Drive past the 6-3 majority opinion that eviscerates the Soviet Democrat Stygian Witches’ dissent and ensure you don’t read it before listening to The Big Guy, Lyin’ Biden.

    Same Lyin’ Biden that recently said it was dangerous to question New York courts Soviet style show trial convictions of Trump in New York. Same Lyin’ Biden who keeps ignoring SCOTUS telling him he has no constitutional authority to move student loans from those who applied for and took them, onto the backs of taxpayers.

    What are the chances that The Real Joe Biden, the people actually using the corrupt puppet as the figurehead to implement Soviet Democrat policy are enraged because they hoped for more trials, more convictions, and hopefully some jail time would give them a boost in their reelection campaign?

    Will this rage display help them get Obama’s Fourth Term in November? I doubt it. It WILL get Bribery Biden’s apparatchiks like Dennis “call me Biden’s Baghdad Bob” McIntyre out in full throated frothing rage.

  7. Honestly, Elvis Bug

    After the last two weeks you’ve had, no one could blame you for tying one on tonight.

  8. Can you really look at Biden and not see the man he really is. Maybe you should take a look at what Carl Bernstein has to say about what has been hidden from the American people. https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/01/politics/video/carl-bernstein-biden-performance-presidential-debate-ac360-digvid. RussiaGate, laptop Russian disinformation and now Biden is just fine. Bernstein says that it has been going on for more than a year. To stay in power the Democrats would be perfectly happy to send a cucumber to negotiate with Putin or the Ayatollah Khomeini. They’re stickin with him through thick an lost no matter what.

    1. TiT,
      I just watched that.
      Bernstein says Biden was on top of foreign policy. But he also says his sources have been a marked incidence of cognitive decline over the past six months.
      At a fundraiser at the Four Seasons restaurant in New York in June of 2023 where the President became “Very stiff…almost like a kind of rigor mortis.”
      Bernstein said they are seeing two sets of different people.
      And that is who the Democrats want you to vote for. Who knows which set of people Biden is going to be on any give day or even hour.
      But, hey! You are not voting for Biden, but Biden’s “team.”

      1. The only thing Biden is on top of is a diaper. Biden foreign policy has been reported as his being on the wrong side for every position he has taken. He has dementia, it’s not new, he had it before 2020. They just can’t pump him full of feel good juice anymore, he’s hit his expiration date.

    2. “We have a problem such as we saw the other night. There have been numerous incidences where the president has lost his train of thought, can’t pick it up again,” Bernstein said.

  9. nothing would be what it is because everything would be what it isn’t and contrary wise what is it would not be the mad hatter imagination is the only weapon in the war against reality l carrol

  10. The only people stupider than Slow Joe are the idiots that would still vote for him. They don’t even know why they hate Trump, they were just told to.

  11. No, no, no, SCOTUS did remove limits. It said he can go after his political opponets with criminal charges (a’la The Republic of Banana) but just that he does so at his peril! No biggie. I’m sure lots of AGs will want to violate civil rights to curry favor with the POTUS. Courts won’t mind, right?

  12. The guy practically flunked out of law school. Another good reason for law schools to raise their standards.

  14. It’s reckless, it’s dangerous, it’s irresponsible for anyone to say this was rigged just because they don’t like the verdict. Our justice system has endured for nearly 250 years, and it literally is the cornerstone of America.
    —-Dear Leader May 30, 2024

    Sorry Libtards

    You have been told by your dear leader to STFU about it.

  15. Joe is the same guy now as in 2021 who looked at his watch every time a soldier’s casket passed him.

  16. John McKinney is a prosecutor in LA, a lifelong Democrat, a Black man, and if you need some ammo to smackdown the commies & lunatic leftists read his response to AOC:

    JOHN MCKINNEY. @johnmckinney_
    “The hysteria has to stop. There was nothing in today’s ruling that surprised anyone who understands that government officials at every level of government are covered by some degree of immunity for official acts. If that were not the case, no one in government would risk making any decision of consequence for fear it might destroy them.

    Moreover, @AOC and others have to stop with the constant threat of impeachment only when court decisions don’t go their way. I didn’t hear @AOC or others in the progressive movement calling for the impeachment of “corrupt” justices when the following cases were decided in their favor with the support of the same conservative Republican justices they now call “corrupt:”

    1. Bostock v. Clayton County (2020) In this landmark case, the Court ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees against discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Justice Neil Gorsuch, along with Chief Justice John Roberts, joined the liberal justices in a 6-3 decision, emphasizing a textualist interpretation of the word “sex” in the statute.

    2. June Medical Services v. Russo (2020)This case involved a Louisiana law requiring abortion providers to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. Chief Justice Roberts sided with the liberal justices in a 5-4 decision, citing adherence to precedent established in a similar Texas case, Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt (2016), which struck down a nearly identical law.

    3. Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California (2020) The Court blocked the Trump administration’s attempt to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. Chief Justice Roberts joined the liberal justices in a 5-4 decision, stating that the administration’s actions were arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act.

    4. Allen v. Milligan (2023) In this voting rights case, Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the liberal justices in a 5-4 decision that upheld a lower court ruling finding that Alabama’s congressional map diluted Black political power in violation of the Voting Rights Act. This ruling reinforced the protections against racial gerrymandering.

    5. California v. Texas (2021) The Court dismissed a challenge to the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on the grounds of lack of standing. Justices Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Barrett joined the liberal justices in a 7-2 decision, thereby preserving the ACA yet again.

    These cases illustrate that even in a predominantly conservative Supreme Court, there are significant deviations from what some might expect to happen.

    Disagreeing with individual decisions is one thing, condemning entire institutions and threatening public servants with impeachment when things don’t come out the way one wants is irresponsible and childish.”

    ________________________________________

    Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
    @AOC

    “The Supreme Court has become consumed by a corruption crisis beyond its control.

    Today’s ruling represents an assault on American democracy. It is up to Congress to defend our nation from this authoritarian capture.

    I intend on filing articles of impeachment upon our return.

    2. “Disagreeing with individual decisions is one thing, condemning entire institutions and threatening public servants with impeachment when things don’t come out the way one wants is irresponsible and childish.”

      It’s not just irresponsible and childish, it is an ASSAULT on American democracy.
      The Dems always accuse you of what they are doing. Always.

  17. Why did SCOTUS REMAND the case? Because Trump has immunity for all acts???

    So the lower court has to determine if the president can chat with a SoS about an election legally, but in your mind he has the freedom to assassinate someone suddenly?

    Third graders.

  18. Last night’s appearance by Biden, whining again about democracy being on the line, reusing a common trope by the Democrats was nothing new. What we witnessed the last four years has been an unending charade of lies and an Orwellian experiment in gaslighting a nation. They knew all along Biden was non compos mentis. It is the biggest lie of all. That is because the issues stated in this article regarding the blatant violations of the constitution are being promoted from someone else inside the White House machine rather than Biden. He is the puppet who reads the teleprompter. They knew what they were doing in the shadows, and have shown their hatred for those us who refuse to jump on the progressive train- those of use who value the constitution and a form of government with checks and balances- they betrayed us all with their actions. The nauseating 4 minutes was just one more demonstration of their manipulation over the truth. I applaud the SCOTUS for standing firm against the tide of deliberate and systematic falsehoods and for opening the door for course correction.

  19. I am at the point where I am comfortable, having formerly voted for dems in equal measure, referring to the modern left as sick. This is just getting twisted, and it is dangerous.

    What kind of privileged bubble did people live in from 2016-2020 that they can’t see Trump did none of these things with ample opportunity to be a ‘dictator’ for four years, and Biden et. al., by fiat, have come very close to razing this country and its citizens to the ground in three and a half? It’s madness.

    And the likes of AOC can take her temper tantrums and stick them you know where. 🙄🙄

  20. Breaking – the Biden campaign has issued new demands for the second debate: if teleprompters are not allowed, then he must be permitted to bring his Easter bunny to wave him off any incoherent ramblings, or the debate is off.

Comments are closed.

Res ipsa loquitur – The thing itself speaks

Discover more from JONATHAN TURLEY

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading