This is a news story, published by MSNBC, that relates primarily to Jackson news.
For more Jackson news, you can click here:
more Jackson newsFor more SCOTUS news, you can click here:
more SCOTUS newsFor more news from MSNBC, you can click here:
more news from MSNBCOtherweb, Inc is a public benefit corporation, dedicated to improving the quality of news people consume. We are non-partisan, junk-free, and ad-free. We use artificial intelligence (AI) to remove junk from your news feed, and allow you to select the best politics news, business news, entertainment news, and much more. If you like this article about SCOTUS, you might also like this article about
presidents immunity. We are dedicated to bringing you the highest-quality news, junk-free and ad-free, about your favorite topics. Please come every day to read the latest new Presidential accountability paradigm news, new Presidential accountability model news, news about SCOTUS, and other high-quality news about any topic that interests you. We are working hard to create the best news aggregator on the web, and to put you in control of your news feed - whether you choose to read the latest news through our website, our news app, or our daily newsletter - all free!
criminal immunityMSNBC
•67% Informative
Sotomayor, Jackson and Elena Kagan dissent from the Supreme Court's 6-3 ruling.
They say the decision makes a mockery of the principle that "no man is above the law" Jackson: The relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably.
The potential for great harm to American institutions and Americans and themselves is obvious.
Jackson ended with a similarly stark sign-off: The majority of my colleagues seems to have put their trust in our Court ’s ability to prevent Presidents from becoming Kings through case-by-case application of the indeterminate standards of their new Presidential accountability paradigm. I fear that they are wrong. But, for all our sakes, I hope that they are right. In the meantime, because the risks (and power) the Court has now assumed are intolerable, unwarranted, and plainly antithetical to bedrock constitutional norms, I dissent..
VR Score
72
Informative language
72
Neutral language
22
Article tone
informal
Language
English
Language complexity
60
Offensive language
possibly offensive
Hate speech
not hateful
Attention-grabbing headline
not detected
Known propaganda techniques
detected
Time-value
short-lived
External references
1
Source diversity
1
Affiliate links
no affiliate links