Analyzing the Supreme Court's Decision on Presidential Immunity | Kate Shaw скачать в хорошем качестве

Analyzing the Supreme Court's Decision on Presidential Immunity | Kate Shaw

"While the founders had a range of ideas about the scope of executive power, none of those ideas included conferring immunity on the president in the circumstances at issue here." Kate Shaw critiques a recent Supreme Court decision that grants sweeping immunity to ex-presidents, arguing it fails on several fronts: constitutional text, historical understanding, and precedent. Shaw highlights that the Constitution does not explicitly provide such immunity, and historical figures like Alexander Hamilton believed ex-presidents should be liable to prosecution. The decision is also seen as inconsistent with previous rulings that emphasize accountability. Shaw condemns the Supreme Court’s shift toward a pragmatic reasoning that contrasts sharply with its usual disdain for considering consequences in other legal areas. [00:00] Intro: Problems with the Chief Justice's Immunity Opinion [00:30] No Presidential Immunity in the Constitution [00:39] Textual Clues Against Immunity [00:47] Impeachment Doesn't Preclude Criminal Prosecution [01:34] No Comparable Immunity Provision for Presidents [01:54] Founding Era History [02:07] History Speaks with Surpassing Clarity [02:25] Hamilton: Former Presidents Liable to Prosecution [02:45] Wilson & Iredell: Presidents Punishable by Law [03:13] Constitutional Structure & Separation of Powers [03:23] Madison's Federalist 51: Ambition Must Counteract Ambition [04:10] Precedents: Court and Non-Court [04:27] Court Precedents: US v. Nixon (Watergate Tapes) [04:46] Trump v. Vance (Manhattan DA Subpoena) [05:19] Purported Reliance on Youngstown & Nixon v. Fitzgerald [05:34] Non-Judicial Precedent: Previous Presidents Understood Liability [05:55] FDR's Airport Plan & Going to Jail [06:40] Ford's Pardon of Nixon [07:00] Clinton's Deal with Robert Ray [07:47] McConnell: Former Presidents Are Not Immune [08:06] Trump v. US: Reasoning from Consequences [08:30] The Court's Consequentialist Reasoning [08:42] Pragmatism Vs. The Court’s Disdain for Policy Reasoning [09:50] Guns (Heller): No Consideration of Usefulness [10:01] Thomas (Bruen): Reliance on History [10:17] Alito (Dobbs): No Authority to Let Knowledge Influence Decision [12:32] Court Disregards Frameworks When They Don't Get Their Way -- Watch Kate Shaw's full lecture ►    • The 20th Annual Robert H. Jackson Lecture ...   -- ► Become a CHQ Assembly Member    / @chautauquainstitution   -- As a not-for-profit organization, all of Chautauqua Institution's programs and offerings are made possible by philanthropy. We welcome your support and engagement! Visit giving.chq.org to make a gift. -- Like CHQ on Facebook:   / chq1874   Follow CHQ on Instagram:   / chq1874   Follow CHQ on TikTok:   / chq_1874