Reply
Fri 12 Jan, 2007 10:13 am
He admitted on National TV that he's made mistakes... that our policy up to now has failed... that ultimately the blame rests with him. He has come foreward and taken responsibility.
Could the families of dead military and others negatively impacted by his ADMITTEDLY failed war bring a class action suit in Civil Court?
Hitting him in the one place he REALLY carea about.... his pocketbook, and sending him home from the White House broke would be the sweetest result of his failed presidency and life IMO.
What are the realisticchances of this you legal experts?
Sure ... in America, anybody can sue anyone for anything.
Why don't you pony up the filing fee and give it a shot?
Chances? You want to know what your chances are? I think you already know what your chance of success is.
Ticomaya wrote:Sure ... in America, anybody can sue anyone for anything.
Why don't you pony up the filing fee and give it a shot?
Chances? You want to know what your chances are? I think you already know what your chance of success is.
Why would I pony up a fee? I haven't lost a child, brother, sister, parent, cousin in this war.
I'm asking, as an academic question, if it could be done and how it might be expected to proceed. Don't play if you don't want to.
Luckily for us, the rightwingers got the US Supreme Court to agree that the President CAN be sued while still in office. Thank you, Richard Scaife and Paula Jones!!
Joe(Ticomaya, we'll need your help writing the amicus curirae.)Nation
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:Ticomaya wrote:Sure ... in America, anybody can sue anyone for anything.
Why don't you pony up the filing fee and give it a shot?
Chances? You want to know what your chances are? I think you already know what your chance of success is.
Why would I pony up a fee? I haven't lost a child, brother, sister, parent, cousin in this war.
I'm asking, as an academic question, if it could be done and how it might be expected to proceed. Don't play if you don't want to.
I thought I answered the academic questions presented: Yes, you -- or anybody else -- can sue the President. No, you -- and anybody else -- have little to no chance of success because of the President's common law executive immunity.
so you're saying that the president is basically protected by a law on the books from succesful prosecuiton in civil or criminal court?
The President (and most other public officials) is generally protected from civil suits for any actions/decisions he/she makes/doesn't make (provided they are legally authorized to make them...) while carrying out their official duties.
You could sue, for example, if he violated one of your constitutional rights and you could show that he had no authority to do so. You can't sue just because he made mistakes however. Public officials are granted a "sphere of autonomy". Any decisions they make within that shpere (rightly or wrongly) aren't subject to criminal prosecution or civil liability.
then why did the supremes allow paula jones to sue clinton, as previously mentioned....
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:then why did the supremes allow paula jones to sue clinton, as previously mentioned....
1) The President of the US enjoys absolute executive immunity from liability for his/her official acts;
2) Clinton was not the President at the time he committed the acts against Paula Jones as alleged in her petition; and
3) Clinton's tortious acts, as alleged in Jones' petition, were not "official acts."
now see, this is the kind of thing I was looking for.... to understand. I'm no dumb ass but I'm not an attorney.....
Yes, of course you can sue a president because he started a war and people died in it - a situation utterly unknown in human or American history.
Or, wait a minute. Here's a wild idea. How about just waiting for the next election and trying to get people to vote for your candidate? That's what someone who believed in democracy would do.
Brandon9000 wrote:Yes, of course you can sue a president because he started a war and people died in it - a situation utterly unknown in human or American history.
Or, wait a minute. Here's a wild idea. How about just waiting for the next election and trying to get people to vote for your candidate? That's what someone who believed in democracy would do.
missed the point in an attempt to score a point with the debate team again.......
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:Brandon9000 wrote:Yes, of course you can sue a president because he started a war and people died in it - a situation utterly unknown in human or American history.
Or, wait a minute. Here's a wild idea. How about just waiting for the next election and trying to get people to vote for your candidate? That's what someone who believed in democracy would do.
missed the point in an attempt to score a point with the debate team again.......
On what basis would you sue him, and in what way would these alleged wrong action of his violate law or be different from common historical behavior of presidents? I have news for you - starting a war in which people die is neither illegal nor uncommon.
Brandon9000 wrote:Yes, of course you can sue a president because he started a war and people died in it - a situation utterly unknown in human or American history.
Or, wait a minute. Here's a wild idea. How about just waiting for the next election and trying to get people to vote for your candidate? That's what someone who believed in democracy would do.
missed the point in an attempt to score a point with the debate team again.......
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:Brandon9000 wrote:Yes, of course you can sue a president because he started a war and people died in it - a situation utterly unknown in human or American history.
Or, wait a minute. Here's a wild idea. How about just waiting for the next election and trying to get people to vote for your candidate? That's what someone who believed in democracy would do.
missed the point in an attempt to score a point with the debate team again.......
Translation: I cannot support my opinions or answer any challenges to them, so I respond only with irrelevancies.
This was an interesting question. One thing I'm curious about (I think I know the answer to this, but ...), certainly official acts are covered and so there is no viable course of action vs. them. I take it that, for Nixon, since the wiretapping was not an official act, no matter how much he may have tried to justify it vis a vis the enemies list, etc. And certainly campaigning for public office, even for a sitting President trying to be elected, isn't an official Presidential act.
But what happens when/if a President hits a more grey area? I am not speaking of anyone in particular here. What about piling on troops in a foreign country without Congressional approval? Or calling the troops "advisors" and then oh so conveniently handing them weapons and suddenly converting them into soldiers? I'm thinking more of Johnson here.
E. g. the President says something, makes the whole thing look official. But covertly it's something else. And let's say it's not necessarily a covert operation fully supported by the CIA. It comes to light that the President was behaving outside his official powers and was given license to act because people (in the cabinet, the Senate, whatever) had been duped. Would a cause of action potentially arise?
watch it jespah you're dangerously close to a non partisan what if discussion here. :wink:
I like to live dangerously. Or lay on the guilt. I forget which.
I didn't go to the Centerport School for Jewish Mothers for forty-four years for nothin'.
if you can't sue him, can two thirds of you at least line up to kick him in the nuts
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace