Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: frog in a pot; All
(Frivolous as in filed with the intent to harass, annoy, or disturb the opposite party and subject to loss of license to practice law.)

She is an official prosecutor. The Supreme Court, in 1976, gave her near total immunity, created out of thin air.

15 posted on 08/26/2023 2:48:05 PM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]


To: marktwain
The Supreme Court, in 1976, gave her near total immunity, created out of thin air.

You are correct about that and perhaps it is time for our current, hopefully more enlightened SC to review that 1976 holding.

Thanks for the link, I will quote from it:

...experience shows that this immunity enables prosecutors to disregard constitutional rights in order to pursue convictions. 
That is a pretty good argument right there for tossing the doctrine.

1976 decision Imbler v. Pachtman, the Supreme Court created this immunity to serve the “public trust” and ensure “the proper functioning of the criminal justice system".  

The Trump et al case ought to be significant enough to gain the attention of our current SC. The prosecutorial behavior in this instance - mass prosecution of a crime where there is no crime - dramatically does quite the opposite of serving that trust or demonstrating proper functioning.

18 posted on 08/26/2023 3:19:03 PM PDT by frog in a pot (Open borders are the most cost-effective way to dilute a nation's culture, look around the globe. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson