@BTE It happened, and along ideological lines.

Not really, they ruled that "As for a president's unofficial acts, there is no immunity."

But it is absolute for official acts, and the legal argument of his defense claimed the acts in question as official. That's what the market is about.

Yeah, I guess you're right. I was confused by the fact that he was trying to delay the New York trial on the basis of immunity, but it seems like that was still only claiming immunity for official acts that might be involved.

You're right to be confused! The court and the former president both seem uninterested in any kind of clear test for what is and isn't official!

Spelling is hard

@BrianMark Which one did I get wrong?

@BTE clarance

Alito is a /pol/ troll in a robe. He's absolutely the most likely to do this.

"most likely" != "likely"

@BTE Presuming the majority opinion rejects Trump's claim, how would you resolve a dissenting opinion that does not fully endorse Trump's "absolute immunity for everything" claim but still rejects the majority dismissal and thinks Trump's claims have some sort of merit?