The recent Supreme Court 6-3 ruling providing the President immunity from criminal prosecution for acts committed within the framework of his constitutional powers is both immoral and necessary. Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s dissent that the ruling affords the president the ability to assassinate a political rival, (even though the charges against former President Trump do not remotely approach that level and may not even hold merit), is proven correct by history.

• The ruling would have made Andrew Jackson immune for his forced removal of the Cherokee, Muscogee, Seminole, Chickasaw, and Choctaw from their ancestral lands, portrayed by one Choctaw leader as "A Trail of Tears and Deaths".
• The ruling would have made Abraham Lincoln immune for his acts that shut down newspapers, suspended habeas corpus, and imprisoned thousands without trial.
• The ruling would have made Franklin Roosevelt immune for his incarceration of American citizens of Japanese descent.
• The ruling would have made Harry Truman immune for the intentional nuclear bombing of thousands of Japanese civilians.
• The ruling would have made Lyndon Johnson immune for his lies about the Gulf of Tonkin incident that led to the death of thousands of American soldiers and millions of Vietnamese.
• The ruling would have made Richard Nixon immune for the bombing of Cambodia and the innocent civilians he killed there.
• The ruling makes Barack Obama immune for the drone killing of Abdulrahman Al-Alwaki in Yemen, a 16 year old boy and an American citizen, while attempting to kill his father who had never been charged with any crime.
• The ruling makes Joe Biden immune for the conspiracy to commit battery by coercing thousands of military and health care personnel to accept an experimental medical procedure in violation of the Nuremberg Code.

These are all immoral acts by various presidents that are indisputably criminal in nature. Yet the essence of the Supreme Court ruling was that presidents must make difficult decisions with possibly the fate of the world at stake, and therefore cannot be hampered when making these decisions by the possibility of future criminal charges. So we are left with the dilemma of choosing to be immoral by necessity. Yet it is only necessary because of the current policies and past immoral actions of the United States. Since the early 1800s and the Era of Good Feeling, the United States has been transformed from an experiment in individual freedom and classical liberalism into an oligarchy of statist collectivism recklessly intent on world domination.

Since the McKinley administration America has been a model for imperialism. It was the beginning of American empire and the rejection of the foreign policy principles of Washington and Jefferson. American imperialism has been less overt than that of the Europeans of the colonial era or the totalitarians of the 20th century, but it has been just as effective and may be more lasting. Today it is more economic in nature than political, but it still has devastating effects. For example, the CIA led coup in Ukraine in 2014 resulted from the Ukraine president choosing to obtain a loan from Russia rather than western banks. Ukraine is the second largest geographic area in Europe, and has abundant natural resources and fertile farmlands. The struggle for control of Ukraine became one of economic benefit rather than political philosophy, brought on by the capture of the U.S. government by corporations. This long journey has transformed America into a fascist state.

As typical with fascists states, this transformation has led to the loss of individual liberty domestically. It began in 1913 with the passage of the 16th Amendment and has progressed steadily until today when we are told what kind of light bulbs we can buy. The amazingly effective propaganda campaign has led the general population to believe the extraordinary irony that we are fighting abroad to defend our liberty at home. Goebbels would have been jealous.

So if you are among those who think this was a bad ruling by the Supreme Court, in order to be consistent, you must reject the entire philosophy of the American government since the 1890s, as I do. If you are among those who think this was a good ruling, then you must accept the American philosophy since the 1890s and endorse the principles of Mussolini on which it stands.

This ruling is just another step in that statist journey. The state is beyond redemption. It is an unguided missile on autopilot bound for destruction. We must reject the necessity of immorality. The only hope is for enough people to awaken, reject the status quo and adopt a revival of liberty at home and peace abroad.

Comments are not available at this time.

Recommended Reading Offsite