Peggy is right about the overall statements made, but incorrect when she says this:
"In summary, this decision is significant because it’s the first to define the scope of presidential immunity, ensuring that presidents are accountable for their actions without hindering their constitutional duties."
There's nothing guaranteeing any future president will be reined in.
Peggy is right about the overall statements made, but incorrect when she says this:
"In summary, this decision is significant because it’s the first to define the scope of presidential immunity, ensuring that presidents are accountable for their actions without hindering their constitutional duties."
There's nothing guaranteeing any future president will be reined in.
Peggy is right about the overall statements made, but incorrect when she says this:
"In summary, this decision is significant because it’s the first to define the scope of presidential immunity, ensuring that presidents are accountable for their actions without hindering their constitutional duties."
There's nothing guaranteeing any future president will be reined in.
https://tomrenz.substack.com/p/trump-in-the-supreme-court-he-is?
I get it.