The president is not above the law. The Supreme Court has gone too far.
  1. United States
  2. Wash.
  3. Letter

The president is not above the law. The Supreme Court has gone too far.

To: Rep. Strickland, Sen. Murray, Sen. Cantwell

From: A constituent in University Place, WA

July 3

Yesterday's SCOTUS decision on presidential immunity raises concerns. Congress should consider drafting and passing a bill providing legal definitions of US Const. Art. II "official acts" of a president. Section 4 of Article II makes clear that the framers of the Constitution did not intend to immunize the president from "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." The Section 4 check on executive power does not deprive the judicial or legislative branches of their express constitutional powers under Articles I and III. In other words, Section 4 cannot be read as being exhaustive. A president is not a monarch. He/she cannot be "above the law." Presidential "official acts" therefore can and should be defined as excluding criminal conduct, including treason, bribery, and other high crimes (felonies) and misdemeanors. A federal law in this regard can provide future guidance on cases under the immunity/non-immunity test described in SCOTUS's decision yesterday. Thank you for serving,

Share on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on LinkedInShare on WhatsAppShare on TumblrEmail with GmailEmail

Write to Marilyn Strickland or any of your elected officials

Resistbot is a chatbot that delivers your texts to your elected officials by email, fax, or postal mail. Tap above to give it a try or learn more here!