Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Statute of limitations on Trump over Stormy Daniels [View all]hlthe2b
(102,188 posts)12. I agree. The problem is the "not charging a sitting President" is a DOJ policy based on a poorly
crafted legal opinion that dates to the whole Nixon-Spiro Agnew legal debacles. It has become a tradition and one DOJ has not chosen to revisit it even though many former prosecutors and scholars have called for them to do so. Given there is no court review of any law upholding a "no prosecution of sitting President" standard, it would be difficult to enact changes in these statutes of limitations Federal laws to allow for a "pause." Of course, states can if they have laws that run parallel to the Federal law (as NY does in this instance).
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
34 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I did not say otherwise. But it IS TRUE that the Federal Statute of Limitations has run.
hlthe2b
Jan 2023
#4
I get that, but it is relevant that the Federal SOL has run. To the extent Trump's lawyers are ever
hlthe2b
Jan 2023
#7
I agree. The problem is the "not charging a sitting President" is a DOJ policy based on a poorly
hlthe2b
Jan 2023
#12
The discussion was on revisiting the policy with the DOJ Office of Legal Counsel for new analysis.
hlthe2b
Jan 2023
#19