Should ALL litigation against any sitting POTUS be in held abeyance? State criminal charges? Federal criminal charges? Civil lawsuits?

[DrPepper12]

POTUS is an important job that MUST be somewhat insulated from lawfare - you would have to be a naive fool to think otherwise.

That said let's flip it a bit. Is justice TRULY served for any alleged victim just because the accused has "an important job"? Is justice delayed justice denied?

Should POTUSs be temporarily shielded from civil litigation for events that took place BEFORE sitting?

Is there the potential for real people with or without STANDING to depose / harass a POTUS interminably so as to interfere with the job?

Is there the potential for real people WITH standing to be denied justice because of the office of the alleged offender?

IYKYK me & my opinion on some issues, I have to look right just to see Karl Marx (ya like that one fellas? 🤣😂🤣) BUT this "far lefty" ACKNOWLEDGES & AGREES that the greater good MUST skew toward some variant of POTUS being allowed to delay / abey litigation but HOW FAR until the deference becomes a problem for proper administration of justice?

Presidents aren't kings but neither are private citizens... Now what?

NO lawsuits of ANY kind proceeds while sitting. NONE!

No FEDERAL CRIMINAL suits. State criminal & all civil is fine.

No criminal suits - federal or state - while sitting. ALL civil suits are fine.

If proceedings began BEFORE sitting then let it ride for ALL types of cases

Here's the deal pal...

[MisterWack]

“If proceedings began BEFORE sitting then let it ride for ALL types of cases”. Because in that case, what is stopping P Diddy from running for President then having brain dead minions vote for him to protect him….

I really don’t care party lines here because it is a new day, now Presidents who were crooks before office can get away with anything & just declare “we are the opposition, it is allowed!”

Donald Trump actually supported the idea of having a sitting president go through indictment & face criminal trial. Just watch the 2016 clip from Nevada (I’ll provide).

[MisterWack]

“If she were to win this election, it would create an unprecedented constitutional crisis. In that situation, we could very well have a sitting president under felony indictment and ultimately a criminal trial.”
-Donald J Trump (Nov 5th, 2016 Reno, Nevada)
9:10
https://youtu.be/yDmrom_TMaE?

[exitseven]

The Supreme Court must call an emergency session to decide if the charges really are valid and if it is determined that they were just filed for election interference the DA and prosecutor go to prison. This will discourage any future lawfare cases being brought against candidates opposing the current administration.

[DrPepper12]

Impossible and unconstitutional under our current paradigm but interesting

[Anonymous]

Absolutely. A real investigation needs to be undertaken to establish how many of these cases are politically motivated. Biden told us to trust the system and that cases are never politically motivated, then he does a complete 180 and pardons his son for all crimes he committed in the last 11 years, all even the ones that he hadn't been charged or investigated with. Biden's reason is because the law system can be weaponised for political reasons.

[DrPepper12]

How would you discern political reasons? That's not objective

[Opinion Owner]

For starters would the case be brought to court in the first place if not for political reasons.

[slatyb]

Civil suits are totally in bounds. Criminal charges in state court likely are too, but SCOTUS will end up ruling on that. We've never been stupid enough to elect a criminal as President until now.

[Anonymous]

Federal charges can wait due to being a conflict of interest, state charges can proceed against his estate as long as they don't expect him to show up.

[beefcakebradybatson]

They WILL be now that he's President again.