Trails court does. You obviously didn’t read the ruling. We have nothing to discuss.

The Constitution bestows the power upon the presidential office onto the president. Not SCOTUS.

Incorrect. Breaking the law is never an official act of the office, and therefore, cannot be protected.

I wonder, what do you think the ruling changed? What can the president do now that the president wasn’t able to do before?

Yes, because it doesn’t fall within the powers granted to the president via the constitution. He cannot sexually harass her. He cannot kill her. He cannot take bribes from her. So on and so forth.

No. The president could not personally kill their maid.

Trump was president for four years, enjoyed all of this immunity already, and not one politician was murdered. Pretty sure we’ll be alright.

Says right in the ruling it’s up to the trails court to determine what is official.

A president can’t claim immunity. The president has always had immunity for acts that the constitution provides the office.

The president has inferred immunity for powers shared with Congress.

The president enjoys no immunity for acts as a private citizen.

These are important distinctions.

You or I cannot bomb another country. The president can.

You or I cannot kill a maid. The president cannot.

Only acts used with the power of the office are immune. You can’t use presidential authority to sexually harass your staff. That’s against the law.

The ruling didn’t change anything, nor was anything given. SCOTUS doesn’t create the law. We don’t have a magical genie godking president all of a sudden.