The Australian reports the latest Newspoll finds Labor recovering a 51-49 lead on two-party preferred, after the last result three weeks ago recorded a draw. However, both sides are down on the primary vote, Labor by a point to 32% and the Coalition by three to 36%, with the Greens up two to 13%, One Nation steady on 7% and others up two to 12%. Anthony Albanese is down one on approval to 42% and up three on disapproval to 53%, while Peter Dutton is down one to 38% and up five to 54%. Albanese’s lead as preferred prime minister is 46-38, unchanged from last time. The poll also finds 42% support for Peter Dutton’s proposal of building nuclear power plants in seven locations announced last week, with 45% opposed. The poll was conducted Monday to Friday from a sample of 1260.
PageBoi says:
Tuesday, July 2, 2024 at 8:17 am
At this point I don’t even think it’s about the Greens motion or even necessarily the recognition of Palestine. Senator Payman clearly isn’t happy with the ALPs actions (or rather lack of them) when it comes to the Gaza situation. Albo and Penny Wong could do any number of things at this point beyond merely ‘urging restraint’, which is worth precisely nothing. I outlined some of the things the government could actually do yesterday, like recalling our ambassador, sanctioning the Israeli leadership, ending military ties and arms sales/purchases with Israeli firms. If the government did ANY of these things it would go a hell of a long way to calming the sentiment of the muslim community and no doubt Senator Payman would back the government’s position and feel comfortable toeing the caucus line
The government has rightly called out the Hamas atrocity for what it is and has sanctioned Hamas appropriately, but it seems content to stand by and do nothing practical in the face of Israeli war crimes against civilians and borderline ethnic cleansing, whilst continuing to ‘do business’ with Israel and call them an ally, all whilst crapping on about the rules based order when it suits them. It’s a massive double standard and good on Senator Payman for taking a stand on it
_________
And yet Payman abstained from voting for the Labor amendment. That is evidence against this argument.
AE:
“The fact that you view the whole Payman saga through the lenses of ‘the decline of the 2 party duopoly’ PageBoi tolls the bell: you are just looking for any issue to play politics with in order to shave votes off Labor’s left flank.
There is no real moral principle at play here: just marxist electoral theory.”
That’s some world class born to rule stuff right there
in 2022 I was as disgusted with the Morrison government as anyone, and for the first time in my life I donated money to, and volunteered for a political campaign that aimed to get rid of a sitting Nationals member. There’s a reason it was an independent ‘teal’ campaign that I got behind rather than the ALP or even the Greens.
it’s telling that either you nor C@t have offered any real defence of the ALP position and resort to criticisms of ‘playing politics’ or spurious notions that I’m somehow defending Hamas by criticising the actions of the Israeli government . If the ALP really cared about the so called rules based order rather than simply wanting to climb ever further up the fundament of the US, then it might consider sanctioning the Israeli leadership on the condition that they submit themselves to the ICC to have their case heard RE war crimes, as it has rightly done to the leadership of Hamas.
PageBoi @ #595 Tuesday, July 2nd, 2024 – 8:17 am
I outlined some of the things the government could actually do yesterday, like recalling our ambassador
Which would leave no point of contact for Palestinians to get out of Gaza and come to Australia. Which the government HAS been doing. Also, this silly idea of yours would deny Australia on the ground representation to the Israeli government. Is that what you want? For Netanyahu to become untethered from Australian influence on his government and its actions!?! And Australia then stands mutely by because we have withdrawn our Ambassador?
sanctioning the Israeli leadership
Without sanctioning Hamas as well this is a meaningless gesture politics move.
ending military ties and arms sales/purchases with Israeli firms.
Already done by the government.
If the government did ANY of these things it would go a hell of a long way to calming the sentiment of the muslim community and no doubt Senator Payman would back the government’s position and feel comfortable toeing the caucus line
Probably not because there are too many in the Muslim community who see this as their best chance to weaken Australian government support for Israel in general and increase it for the Muslim world.
That’s simply politics.
1. How many ‘muslim’ votes (and where) are going to switch from the ALP to muslim protest candidates?; and
2. Where, ultimately do these votes land in the final 2PP count (ie. do they end up back with the ALP, go to the LNP or some third party candidate – Greens or other – in the final count)?
Bonus question: how many ‘Muslim protest votes’ actually manifest as either informal votes or exhaust (ie. every box on the ballot is numbered except for the ALP and/or LNP candidate: which I understand the AEC will still count as a formal vote until it exhausts
)
Edit: Badthinker has had more coffee than me this morning
==============================================
Andrew-E.
It’s an interesting set of questions you posed at 7.45am
On the face of it, I would say there would be an increase in the informal vote in the electorates another poster listed last night, but I’ll have a think and drop my thoughts later today. Obviously an increase in the informal vote will still benefit one party over another, so the questions you pose are very relevent.
A Reform UK candidate advocated for Nicola Sturgeon to be shot and called JK Rowling a “wild bitch”, it can be revealed, as Nigel Farage pledged to put the party under “much stricter control”.
Robert Smith, the party’s candidate in Orkney & Shetland, used social media to call Christine Lagarde, the president of the European Central Bank, “head bitch of the globalists” and told female journalists that men would not want to sleep with them.
In one foul-mouthed tirade on Twitter/X he targeted Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission. In another he used slurs against gays and lesbians. He also likened the rainbow symbol used on posters supporting the NHS during Covid as “the new swastika”.
The social media posts, unearthed by The Times, are the latest in a number of controversial comments made by Reform candidates. Farage, the party’s leader, has apologised for candidates who “should never, ever have been there” and said he would put the party under “much, much stricter control”.
Ann Widdecombe, a spokeswoman for the party, said that sexist language was “unacceptable”. Smith’s comments were made between 2016 and last year. In one post from 2016 he shared an article about Nicola Sturgeon and said: “Since the great David Attenborough legitimised calls for political leaders to be shot, why not start with this bitch?”. In another, from 2020, he called the former Scottish first minister a “silly crawling bitch” and in another post four days later calls her “the silly bitch”.
https://www.thetimes.com/article/470cfaeb-f478-4e6b-b1a3-374f8f7c396c?shareToken=09ca128e300cbe69ab0a2ac5864b41cf
David Rowe and the new King Donald the First.
”
Mavissays:
Tuesday, July 2, 2024 at 2:23 am
This I think is a more sober critique of the immunity decision.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qTWMqTYCZ0
”
Mavis
Whether you like it and accept or not, US Supreme Court is absolute and complete disgrace.
A country, which says it abides by the rule of the law, has the highest court, which promotes anarchy, can no longer be the leader of the world.
To put it mildly America’s ugliness is there for everyone to see and US is down the rabbit hole.
As BK so eloquently puts it: America is f**ked
LNP looking sick at 33 primary on Essential.
Peter Dutton’s Nuclear Tax on everything not going down well
Omg… let’s make it real simple.
If you have a state actor, and a non state actor, there are parts of international law that can apply to one, but not the other… because the vast vast vast majority of the framework of the international laws based system is predicated towards the actors being state based.
Hamas is not a state based actor, as it has no state. Thus it is sanctioned in line with non state actors.
Israel is a state, and therefore can be sanctioned in line with other states.
To continue to claim that Hamas = Palestinians, ignoring that there hasn’t been elections in the lifetime of a very large percentage tage of gazans, is a very dangerous line because the moment you conflate citizens with an entity… well, if Palestinians are all responsible for the actions of hamas, then why does the same not apply for Israel? Israel is a democratic state; ergo, the argument can be made that israeli citizens have more sway on israeli policy then gazans on hamas. Does that make israeli citizens targets of opportunity? Jesus christ no… but that’s how your logic sounds eith regards to gazans.
Statehood is not a reward, it’s basically something that’s been held over the heads of the Palestinians for almost a century now… sorry william
Ten things to watch as the UK general election results roll in
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/30/ten-things-to-watch-as-the-uk-general-election-results-roll-in
I would like to think that the Government’s foreign policy positions are not strongly influenced by local politics, including the atttitudes of migrant groups. I was a little concerned that the decision to support the recent UN motion was something of a sop to the ALP left. Any move by the government to go further would be even more concerning.
And any form of recognition of “Palestine” has no purpose beyond symbolism. There is no Palestinian
nation state: a quasi state was established through the Oslo process, and it fairly quickly split into two hostile parts. As Gertrude Stein once said in relation to a return visit to her home town of Oakland California after many decades, “there is no there there.”
Really, the whole thing is a nonsense. Payman is just another of those parliamentarians from a particular party who come along from time to time who somehow didn’t understand that they are expected to vote as the party determines. As WS Gilbert explained it almost a century and a half ago:
“When in that House M.P.’s divide,
If they’ve a brain and cerebellum, too,
They’ve got to leave that brain outside,
And vote just as their leaders tell ’em to.
But then the prospect of a lot
Of dull MPs in close proximity,
All thinking for themselves, is what
No man can face with equanimity.”
BTW, what would the Greens do if one of their own members chose to vote against a resolution calling for a Palestinian state. Interesting thought.
PS: And no more comments from me on this subject. Let’s all have an argument today about US politics instead.
Nadia88 so the Muslim primary vote shifts from the alp.
I think the theory is where does it have to go with compulsory preferential voting.
Probably right (unless there is a deliberate informal campaign) but the more significant factor is further fragmentation of the primary vote.
How much more can the first pref vote fragment – I would have thought as we head to 60% (alp/lnp) first pref vote the more the final 2 in seats will not be a traditional contest.whats the cross bench 10% of parly now and more in the senate – its only going higher as the primary fragments.
Ultimately the end result has to be more fragmentation and the end goal a new voting system. To paraphrase someone it’s going to be beautiful in its ugliness.
Briefly, 2 things come to mind.
This ruling also makes SCOTUS more powerful. They will decide if the King has immunity in each specific case.
The ruling should make the American people think more bigly on who they vote for,
“LNP looking sick at 33 primary on Essential.”
30% for Labor not looking real flash either.
C@t,
the government HAS sanctioned Hamas. It is a designated terrorist organisation which comes with all manner of consequences for that organisation and its members.
whereas we continue to sell military goods to Israel via the F35 program (note I have refrained from calling them ‘arms’), continue to purchase arms from companies like Elbit systems, and there have been basically zero diplomatic or financial consequences to the israeli state for its actions
Spot the difference
Lordbain:
Yes, I agree.
Ashasays:
Tuesday, July 2, 2024 at 9:10 am
Lordbain:
If you have a state actor, and a non state actor, there are parts of international law that can apply to one, but not the other… because the vast vast vast majority of the framework of the international laws based system is predicated towards the actors being state based.
Hamas is not a state based actor, as it has no state. Thus it is sanctioned in line with non state actors.
Israel is a state, and therefore can be sanctioned in line with other states.
To continue to claim that Hamas = Palestinians, ignoring that there hasn’t been elections in the lifetime of a very large percentage tage of gazans, is a very dangerous line because the moment you conflate citizens with an entity… well, if Palestinians are all responsible for the actions of hamas, then why does the same not apply for Israel? Israel is a democratic state; ergo, the argument can be made that israeli citizens have more sway on israeli policy then gazans on hamas. Does that make israeli citizens targets of opportunity? Jesus christ no… but that’s how your logic sounds eith regards to gazans.
Statehood is not a reward, it’s basically something that’s been held over the heads of the Palestinians for almost a century now…
Yes, I agree.
____________________
+1
”
gollsays:
Tuesday, July 2, 2024 at 6:45 am
“Peace for our time” claimed Neville Chamberlaine.
And how did that work out.
Whatever the result of the Presidential Election in the US, there is now a problem, which, if they get lucky,
” may just go away”!
The Americans are fond of prayer.
Democracy “got smacked in the mouth” before, during and after the last election and they’re lining up for another chance to prove that their system on so many levels is “off the rails”.
”
“Democracy only “got smacked in the mouth” before, but after next election it could be murdered. America is right on the cusp of anarchy. It is only in the hands of American people who can pull it back, where majority of whom are in denial about it with a “doddering old” person on oneside and a Conman, who wants to be “dictator” on day one of his presidency and wants to take “retribution” over his opponents.
I’ll dip into the US Supreme Court ruling, snipped this bit from C@t’s post earlier.
this immunity must be absolute
I’m not sure how this could be any worse in terms of the steps a nation takes towards dictatorships. These steps are not always linear, they don’t happen in a timed fashion nor in marked instants (though sometimes they do, e.g. military coups).
The checklist of a nation moving towards a dictatorship include, and may not always have all of these features:
• Economic crisis or political instability
• Emergence of a strong leader
• Undermining democratic institutions
• Consolidation of power
• Propaganda
• Security apparatus
• Legal and constitutional changes
• New constitution
• Loyal military
• Censorship
• Isolation or breakdown of alliances
Now that the Supreme Court has effectively ruled that the head of state can undertake actions which can never be prosecuted via the legal system one of the most important safeguards in a functional democracy has been removed. It’ll be so easy for every memo to have the phrase “the president is exercising their core constitutional powers in implementing this decree”.
I’m not expecting the US to turn into one of those standard 20th century “president for life” style dictatorships, it’ll be more refined it its authoritarianism (an evolution in political theory if you will).
But I do expect the following, complete and unfettered control of resources by private companies, rule by decree bypassing the political process, elections having less and less meaning, laws aimed at promoting one section of society over another, a political class that is above the law (at least the part of that class aligned with the president), graft on a scale that is unimaginable (see above, control of resources by private companies), the severing or ignoring of major treaties, prosecutions of entire swathes of opposition political activists, and so on.
Flippantly it could be said the US already has all of those features.
The bottom line is:
Labor hasn’t done what it promised
Power Bills skyrocket, Cost of Living skyrockets, violence against women on a tear, True Believers thinning out, the leadership full of ex Private Schoolboys and hopelessly out of touch …
Morning all. Thanks for the roundup BK. There is a lot of pretty disturbing news today. I will leave the Senator Payman debate to others.
What concerns me most is the SCOTUS decision. It concerns a lot more than Trump trials and the Biden v Trump election. This has wide and long term implications.
The decision overturns some of the founding principles of the US nation. It also makes a mockery of any US claims to be leader of a rules based order. POTUS is now no more subject to other authority than Xi Jinping.
The principle that the sovereign is subject to the rule of law (and parliament) has existed since the end of the English Civil War. Any student of history (not just US history) knows there is good reason for that.
As AE said, a POTUS could use this power to destroy another country, allied or enemy, with impunity. Imagine if Nixon ordering the secret bombing of Cambodia was legal? Or orchestrating the Pinochet coup in Chile? Or an Australian dismissal? 🙁
Australia’s defence establishment is too blindly focused on joining the US defence forces to ponder the implications of this, but they should.
See the West newspaper on its front page has disingenuously captioned a photo of Tanya P putting a consoling arm around Payman as something being done by Albanese’s “rival”.
This is accompanied by a claim that one rate increase will wipe out the benefit of the tax cuts on the assumption (wrongly) that all of the 27 million people in Oz have a mortgage.
No wonder, other than older rusted-on Liberals and their counterparts in the bush, no one else gets this rag. The paper is dying along with the cohort who actually pay good money for 60% advertisements and whatever other stuff the West thinks might be of value.
PageBoi @ #615 Tuesday, July 2nd, 2024 – 9:04 am
These are the cold, hard facts about that claim, PageBoi:
https://www.afr.com/world/middle-east/unpicking-the-war-of-words-on-weapons-exports-to-israel-20240606-p5jjop
tl:dr The claim is not really true.
Biden squibbed the Supreme Court problem in the first 2 years of his term, when he could have increased the number from 9 to say, 15.
There were solid proposals to that effect at the time, including a Presidential Commission
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/SCOTUS-Report-Final.pdf
this report from the congressional Research Service outlines the history of it all
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/LSB/LSB10562
So why did Biden squib it?
Primarily because he is an institutionalist. And spent too much time in the Senate.
Despite having the Reps and a narrow Senate majority, he wouldn’t support removing the ‘Senate filibuster rule’ – on the grounds that a future Republican incumbent could run riot. Hence the Minority Republicans could and would block it.
Well guess what.
So, Trump could be president for the semiquincentennial, responsible for the national message about what the republic means in the 21st century.
By then he would have had a year to work on that.
Tricot @ #622 Tuesday, July 2nd, 2024 – 9:23 am
Also, Saul Eslake said yesterday that once the RBA gets its quarterly data in for the June Quarter it was probably more likely to leave rates on hold than raise them again, just not lower them in August.
With regards to the Supreme Court (and the US government institutions as a whole), it’s honestly not too surprising we ended up here; sure the narrative is that the US rebelled against a king and fought for democracy, but the reality is that you had a bunch of rich landholders who wanted to consolidate power for themselves. Hell, some of the founding fathers wanted a US king… the system was never tk support democracy as we in the 21s century know it
I agree with this tweet from Geoff:
https://x.com/GeoffHutchison/status/1807756321762246916
“I understand caucus loyalty and
how it underpins Labor solidarity and decision-making processes.
But, prioritising process over #FatimaPayman’s sincere belief and desperate concern, seems petty and flimsy and out of touch with public sentiment”
How does Australia differ from the 146 nations that have no difficulty in recognising the State of Palestine?
(Other than the obvious- we have a bipartisan foreign policy run out of Washington)
OC, I keep asking that… and the only answer I got was that Ireland hates the Jews…
Badthinker….
One thing is for sure, Labor in office – Federally – has brought out onto places such as this some of the most deliberately constructed attempts to throw half-truths, lies and suppositions into the mix of debate to muddy the waters. You are one such…………However, this is a democratic forum so there you go……..
If Biden took the advice of the MAGA Supreme Court majority, rather than being the ‘nice guy’, he would start by issuing a few orders. Like instructing the Secret Service to stop protecting Trump
”
Andrew_Earlwoodsays:
Tuesday, July 2, 2024 at 7:49 am
Your pollyannism is appalling this morning Meher. You are truly blind and blinkered.
The rule of law died in America overnight.
The implications for australia are simple. The US President could arrange for a coup or a series of assassinations of the Australian Government if we don’t toe the Washington line overtly and without any fear of legal recriminations. We should break with them now.
”
A-E
Don’t you know US is his favourite country in the world?
Regards how many Muslim votes the ALP will lose to the Greens or independents due to the Payman saga, the question isn’t how many, it’s where.
Wills? It was probably already gone with the new boundaries, but this makes it even harder. Battleground seats in Western Sydney…?
They’re just lucky that the LNP are even more pro-Israel.
Nice one.
Sad part about Payman the Senator, is that she is being played like a fish in a trout stream. Yesterday the local WA Nationals were in full vent mode about live sheep exports and demanding the Labor Senator, which she still is, not only support her Palestinian cause, but put herself out to stop the Labor government’s policy commitment regarding the live export trade.
When was the last time any Senator of any party has put the needs of their respective State ahead of the need for party unity?
Historically, while there is the odd breaking in ranks, most political parties, most of the time, expect their Senators to follow party policy.
The concept of my State first and my party second probably died a few weeks after Federation in 1900/1901.
SCOUTUS in effect rules the President has absolute immunity
Biden has the power to arrest the 6 conservative Justices … he should
Biden has the power to arrest Trump … he should
Sceptic @ #638 Tuesday, July 2nd, 2024 – 9:51 am
He won’t. 😐
Of course he wont; the most generous read is that the democrats take the high ride, when they go low etc etc… so that when they keep losing, at least they can say they played by the rules, and that’s what counts.
Of course, the more accurate reading in my opinion is that the modern democratic party exists to basically lose and ensure that minimal change occurs…
On US politics, the SCOTUS decision is still a huge problem for the Democrats as well as the rest of the western world.
To me the decision only underscores the need for the Dems to replace Biden. Sprocket is right about Biden squibbing on SCoTUS reform when he had the numbers. Not only that, he squibbed on reforming the Senate to be less structurally biased.
He could have started the process to make DC and Puerto Rico states, which would have given the Dems more Senate numbers. This would not have been undemocratic; both have larger populations than several small mid west states.
I have been complaining here that the Democrats leadership is a declining gerontocracy for several terms now. Think Diane Feinstein, Ruth Ginsberg and now Biden as multiple examples of people left in office a decade past retirement age until they made terrible decisions. Its costing them now.
Cat suggested Harris and Buttigieg as a dream ticket the other day. I agree. I think Michelle Obama and Buttigieg could be even better. They need to get moving.
If Trump regains power he won’t just be corrupt. He will be vengeful.
Who is that meant to be in Sohar’s contribution….?
The caricature is totally unrecognisable to me in both message and presentation – that is, if it is meant to be Albanese.
A pathetic effort by both contributor and cartoonist (?)
As an aside, the “artist” has got the hair all wrong and everyone knows from photos in the press that Albanese always has a down-turned mouth and frowns because he looks like that all the time….Well, doesn’t he?
Socrates, it’s nice to see someone call out Ruth here… same ego issue as biden, with the same likely outcome
Tricot @ #644 Tuesday, July 2nd, 2024 – 9:58 am
I think it’s pretty nice street art. Where the artist clearly went wrong is that they should have had a frame system where the head is so it can be interchanged every time we get a new PM 😉
On the topic of the US election; nate silver says the following
Trump up +1.5 in Silver Bulletin nat’l average pre-debate
Let’s say he adds ~2.5 post debate.
That = ~+4
But there’s a ~2-point gap between the tipping point state and popular vote.
Which means Biden would be down ~6 points in the Electoral College.
You can really start to see the outcome from the debate showing
Socrates
A rogue Supreme Court awaits its king
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/7/1/2250254/-A-rogue-Supreme-Court-awaits-its-king?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=top_news_slot_3&pm_medium=web
“Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts admonished liberal members of the court in his opinion that vastly expanded the idea of presidential immunity on Monday. The court’s three liberal members were only “fear mongering on the basis of extreme hypotheticals,” he wrote.
That finger-wag toward terrified, dissenting justices came only a few hours after Donald Trump signaled his desire for “televised military tribunals” that would try former Rep. Liz Cheney for treason. In less than a week, the Supreme Court has issued a string of rulings that demolish the ability of the government to regulate safety, labor, and the environment. Effectively, they’ve made being homeless illegal and being a Trump insurrectionist perfectly fine. And now they’ve presented a vast expansion of presidential power that exceeds the greatest dreams of Richard Nixon.
Everything that the Supreme Court has done in these rulings paves the way for Trump and his allies’ Project 2025 to complete the purge of democracy that this court has already begun. And it all makes defeating Trump infinitely more important.
There was a time when Roberts was seen as a moderating voice on the Supreme Court, as someone who was concerned about the court being accused of partisanship, and who was willing to ally with the court’s more liberal elements to keep a new conservative majority under control. But the court-watchers who made such predictions could not have been more wrong.”
“Jennifer Bendery
@jbendery
On call with Biden-Harris campaign, Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) says SCOTUS’ decision on presidential immunity means a Trump re-election isn’t just the biggest threat to democracy in a generation.
“It’s far and away the biggest threat since the Civil War.”
“
Well that “street art” is a bit out of date with its “free Assange” logo. Albo was part of the crew that did it. Will he get any credit for it? Is the Pope a Jew?
He is immune from prosecution (mostly). Doesnt mean he can do what he wants. Here-in lies the problem. Project 2025 (and previous work by the GOP to control power) is all about making things like this possible for the president by corrupting the institutions that share in the power through certain norms (and now he wont be prosecuted for them if he oversteps into illegality). The Democrats dont have a Project 2025. As Sprocket says, Biden in particular is an institutionalist. Obama, as first black president, felt the need to act similar.
What is striking is how some of the GOP senators deferred their duty to the courts during the second impeachment. Did that come up during the case? Clearly the senators thought he could be held accountable for insurrection and obstructing the handover of power through the courts. Maybe not anymore. And with the GOP senators under sway, SCOTUS, then what? the justice dept, FBI, parts of the military…. a second Trump presidency is the end of whatever type of democracy they currently have.
If a Democrat manages to win the presidency, there is no squibbing it this time. They have to start fixing some of these gaping holes in their system.
Mavis
Despite his odes to stare decisis, Roberts has consistently voted to overturn long-standing precedent. Since gaining the support of three Trump-appointed radicals, Roberts has become a reliable member of a series of 6-3 decisions that have redefined the traditional role of the three branches of government.
In the decision on presidential immunity, Roberts is trying to dismiss the dissents of the three remaining liberal judges as overblown, but if anything, they are a subdued response to this ruling.
The ruling extends absolute immunity to anything that falls within the “‘outer perimeter’ of the President’s official responsibilities, covering actions so long as they are ‘not manifestly or palpably beyond
authority,’” Roberts writes.
In determining whether an act is official, “courts may not inquire into the President’s motives.”
Also, courts can’t “deem an action unofficial merely because it allegedly violates a generally applicable law.”
If you’re having trouble seeing how anyone is permitted to question any action of the president under this ruling, you’re not the only one.
As Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson writes in her dissent, “Departing from the traditional model of individual accountability, the majority has concocted something entirely different: a Presidential accountability model that creates immunity—an exemption from criminal law—applicable only to the most powerful official in our Government.” She makes it clear that the court creates a “multilayered, multifaceted threshold” that would have to be cleared to charge a president under any circumstance, meaning that “no matter how well documented or heinous the criminal act might be,” it can still be dismissed.
And when it comes to the theoretical example that was raised during oral arguments, yes, “a hypothetical President who admits to having ordered the assassinations of his political rivals or critics” or who “indisputably instigates an unsuccessful coup” still has “a fair shot at getting immunity” for those actions.
With regard to the Fatima Payman affair, Bernard Keane had an interesting article about it in Crikey yesterday. One small point Keane raised, which I thought was interesting, was that some factional operatives (hacks, he called them) within the ALP were of the opinion that Payman was a “multicultural blow-in”. This doesn’t quite fit with all the talk of diversity and inclusion.