On Aug. 1, a hearing committee of the District of Columbia Bar recommended the suspension of Jeffrey Clark from the practice of law for two years with reinstatement to be conditioned on demonstrating his fitness to practice law. Clark, one will recall, is the former Trump assistant attorney general who briefly seemed to be designated by Trump as acting attorney general at the Department of Justice, as part of Trump’s efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
…
… the dissonance between the committee’s recommendation and the Supreme Court’s immunity decision in Trump v. United States is stunning. Clark is to be disciplined for conduct as to which the Court says Trump is immune. Though it is possible, logically, to resolve the dissonance without legal gyrations (if only on the ground that presidents are not their subordinates), the difference in outlook is, nonetheless, as stark a demonstration as possible of how differently the bar and the Court conceive of the law and the obligations of the president and the legal profession.
Archived at https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/jeffrey-clark--donald-trump--and-control-of-the-department-of-justice
Immunity is such a bullshit precedent to begin with that we should make zero effort whatsoever to voluntarily increase its scope. Crimes are crimes until explicitly told otherwise by the Supreme Circus
Why would trump being immune protect Jeff Clark from consequences? The supreme Court didn’t even state that what Trump did was legal, only that he’s immune from prosecution.
This will be interesting if allowed to play out. The president* is immune to prosecution, but none of his flunkies are. So he has to do every last thing himself because nobody is gonna risk their neck. I would pay to see that.
The news source of this post could not be identified. Please check the source yourself. Media Bias Fact Check | bot support
