Meaning of: Rule of Law
Rule of law is a principle under which all persons, institutions, and entities are accountable to laws that are: Publicly promulgated. Equally enforced. Independently adjudicated. And consistent with international human rights principles.
July 1, 2024, Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor
“Never in the history of our Republic has a President had reason to believe that he would be immune from criminal prosecution if he used the trappings of his office to violate the criminal law,” wrote Sotomayor. “Moving forward, however, all former Presidents will be cloaked in such immunity. If the occupant of that office misuses official power for personal gain, the criminal law that the rest of us must abide will not provide a backstop,” she added.
“With fear for our democracy, I dissent,” Sotomayor concluded.
Sotomayor full text. ---
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote in a separate dissent that the majority’s ruling “breaks new and dangerous ground” by granting immunity “only to the most powerful official in our Government.”
She said that her conservative colleagues were “discarding” the nation’s long-held principle that no one is above the law.
“That core principle has long prevented our Nation from devolving into despotism,” she said. “Yet the Court now opts to let down the guardrails of the law for one extremely powerful category of citizen: any future President who has the will to flout Congress’s established boundaries.”
The liberal justice described the impact of the court’s ruling in dark terms, saying that “even a hypothetical President who admits to having ordered the assassinations of his political rivals or critics or one who indisputably instigates an unsuccessful coup, has a fair shot at getting immunity under the majority’s new Presidential accountability model.”
“In the end, then, under the majority’s new paradigm, whether the President will be exempt from legal liability for murder, assault, theft, fraud, or any other reprehensible and outlawed criminal act will turn on whether he committed that act in his official capacity, such that the answer to the immunity question will always and inevitably be: It depends,” Jackson wrote.
N
PR Presidental immunityThis SCOTUS ruling, at some point going forward; will apply to all U.S Presidents.
One may argue that 'Rule of Law' for this country is going, going GONE. The term 'President' may be in name only, at some point in the future.
One's investments may be affected going forward by U.S Presidential actions, more than ever before.
Your November VOTE will be the most important of your lifetime.
A HAPPY 4th of July.
Respectfully,
Catch
Comments
Edit: but @catch22 should have a say as it is his thread. Some one can help contrast today's decision to the one given in Nixon's case. In any case, I am not sure how today's ruling would impact the US capital markets in the short to intermediate term.
I hope it was obvious that my previous post was a satire / comedy at the S. Ct.'s activism in general.
Edit, Edit: I am happy to delete both this and my previous post if Catch or others wish.
Important topic. Only wish this were mainly about making and losing money in the markets.
Stop me if you've heard this before. Qualified immunity is justified because: https://supreme.findlaw.com/supreme-court-insights/pros-vs-cons-of-qualified-immunity--both-sides-of-debate.html
It's not a perfect analogy, but it portrays a historical arc of increasing immunity for the government when acting in ways that are anything but very, very illegal. https://eji.org/issues/qualified-immunity/
Getting back to the subject of this thread, the US is still moderately highly ranked (26/142) in 'Rule of Law', generally. Even higher (22nd) in Regulatory Enforcement. Though in both, the US is ranked below the Republic of Korea and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR).
https://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index/global/2023/table
Should we be looking more closely at the HK stock market?
“Post-debate, Trump seems to have received a meaningful bump,” writes Citi's Jabaz Mathai. “We think that yields will be at risk of continuing the move higher from this week on expectations of tax cuts and higher Treasury supply with a Trump White House, with any tempering effect dependent on economic data.”
From the original post: The post is as noted in the subject line: 'Rule of Law'. Rule of Law may have many faces and places, but when too many laws are taken away or seriously perverted, the impacts may show in many places; including one's investments.
And by the way, today is Canada Day. It's not perfect up there, either, but it's nothing like the shit-show we are living through here, south of the border. I lived up there for about a year, many moons ago.
Whether the thread should be moved to OT or stay where it is, my previous post said, "@catch22 should have a say as it is his thread."
Interest rates are expected to continue to be volatile as investors / traders game out who is likely to win. Pick your poison! Good luck to all us.
Now I'm going to go and rewatch a movie I haven't seen in many years about the tension between divine right and the rule of law in days of yore:
Mitch the Grinch gets a helluva lotta credit for stymying the wheels of the Rule of Law. He's another who needs to go. He will not be missed from here.
Ah, found it in HBO library for $3.99 rent. Much cheaper than a hamburger, so TIS a good deal.
Many ordinary folks don't realize that Trump facilitated this far-right SCOTUS fiasco. He and Mitch were quite the team. American democratic values mean nothing to these maniacs.
The "best" part is the life-tenure of a Supreme Court judge.....who also appear to have immunity. The scales are tipping. Its happening in our lifetimes, as those in power go unchecked. If laws mean nothing, the system may eventually crumble.
Will the US economy remain #1? Could Trump as dictator, along with the current SCOTUS and a far-right tilted justice system, tear this country apart? Stay tuned. I didn't think they could ever overturn Roe-Wade, and send us backwards. But it happened.
Umm … My largest foreign holding, based in Switzerland, unfortunately did not benefit from today’s SC decision and related turmoil. Took a good hit. My infrastructure fund, however, mostly concentrated acrosd Europe gained a bit.
Sounds like a good movie @msf. And @Derf I can understand if you have less stressful things to partake of. Myself … got a couple $$ riding on the Mets who are facing the Nationals on ESPN tonight.
To each one's own.
("Snappier" could refer to dialog differences, but "glacial" suggests speed.)
https://www.shakespearenj.org/events/detail/a-man-for-all-seasons (see addl tkt info)
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1013162-man_for_all_seasons
My first reaction to Derf's question was in the same jest as his question; afraid this thread could derail fast into name calling. But after the market closed I realized my curt reply could come across as ignoring Catch, which was not my intent and as such I chose to add the Edit.
I gave you cover with my note to @catch: "I and others did not think or assume that you intend or meant to make this a political thread." You are in the "others."
Thank you. We did find the movie at Roku, as you noted.
In this case glacial refers to all of the backgrounds and atmosphere the movie injects.There's no time for that in a stage production. The interaction between the characters speaking their lines has to carry the show.
Or perhaps I miss the character of The Common Man who cuts through all of that stuff in a production of the play.
Or maybe time, and a little history, has left me less enchanted with More all these years later.
"...Why Richard, it profit a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world. . . but for Wales?!"
A powerful point. Richard had been made Prince of Wales. Richard had sold out, and wanted to get back at Thomas in any case, because early on, Thomas More would not hire him. Richard, it turns out, would do or say whatever anyone else (The King, or Cromwell, or whoever) required him to do or say. Kinda like the majority on the current SCOTUS.
Your post reminded me of a recent Wealth Track Show where the premise of life + liberty (rule of law) = higher long term investment returns.