It’s like saying because dogs don’t go to jail for eating bones trump must be convicted. So yes I reject it as a relevant example

It’s not trolling these are the exact arguments trumps lawyers are making.

That case has no presidential implications. It’s not relevant at all. It establishes no precedent for a president.

Theoretically the president can indeed forget that he ever declassified them. By being in his possession any requirements were satisfied because he himself defined those requirements.

You got me, found a gotcha. I mean convicted.

Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518 (1988)

“The President, after all, is the ‘Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States’” according to Article II of the Constitution, the court’s majority wrote. “His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security … flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President, and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant.”

It’s been generally accepted that the president is not subject to his own executive orders because he can change them at will

The official documents governing classification and declassification stem from executive orders. But even these executive orders aren’t necessarily binding on the president. The president is not “obliged to follow any procedures other than those that he himself has prescribed,” Aftergood said. “And he can change those.”

As Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy wrote.

I will take my $500 in bitcoin thank you.

Removed by mod

Yes. Even if he declassified them first. Because, again, the classification status of the documents does not matter.

If that were true no one would have brought it up.

This is actually the only good argument anyone has made in all these comments. Everything else is “orange man bad hopium”. And is the only reason i’m not 100% sure he won’t be charged convicted. But i’m still 99% sure he’s good to go. Just will have to sit through years of court battles over it.

This violates the Presidential Records Act as those documents became public property once he was no longer president. It again does not matter at all whether or not they were classified.

Not if he declassified them first. Which is what people are saying. He has broad presidential immunity. None of these are going to stand unless you change the makeup of the supreme court

Removed by mod

https://lemmy.world/comment/3207339

I already linked the case

Example of a biased expert

Supreme court has already established Congress has no authority over the president and his use of classified documents.

So because Biden supposedly answered the phone more when he breaks the law it doesn’t count? Where is your logic at? Show me laws, court cases, constitutional arguments not abc links.

And what law are you referring to? From who’s authority is it made?

What a great example of the appeal to authority fallacy . I’m sure everyone here will appreciate the opportunity learn about logical fallacies through your example.

Before I disagree with that statement, is that the law he is charged with breaking? I don’t think so.

Yes I do. Did you forget that he has classified documents at his house from when he was vp? https://www.npr.org/2023/01/21/1150617734/the-doj-searched-bidens-home-and-found-more-classified-documents

Which is objectively illegal. Honestly I think they will give him and Obama the power to retroactively declassify it. Or say Obama said it was declassified. It’s a absolute authority of the president. This court has been pretty consistent in respecting executive authority. They’ve sided with Biden over vaccine mandates for Soldiers who have religious exceptions for example. Even though they are a pretty religious group.