Here, in America, for short, it is called SCOTUS - Supreme Court of the United States. This week, Monday, in June 2024, it did something that, for 800 years, has been unquestioned. SCOTUS granted immunity from prosecution for certain acts taken on as President of the United States. Not since the signing of the Magna Carta by King John in 1215, in the meadows of Runnymede, have we had a leader who was given permission to be above the law. King John, at the time, had been insisting that what he wanted to do was part of the privilege of King. The barons wanted "protection of church rights, protection for people from illegal imprisonment, and access to swift and impartial justice". (Wikipedia).

And later, King Charles 1 was beheaded for the same reason. He too was taking on privileges, insisting on immunity for his actions, and the people, eventually, stopped him.

And now, at the end of June 2024, six people, one woman, white, one man, black, and four other white men voted to re-install their chosen one as king. Really, as king. They tossed aside 800 years of precedence, 800 years of agreement that no person is above the law, no person in the English speaking world can dodge consequences for their actions, whatever their position; 800 years of English common law, upon which a lot of American law is based, in repudiation of such 800 years, SCOTUS granted immunity to a ordinary man for some acts undertaken whilst President.

It was never meant to be this way. From the writings of the various founders, the intention of how America politics would work was that the legislative branch was paramount, and the executive branch and the judicial branch would provide the necessary checks and balances. Our founders were clear, in their white privileged, slave-owning and land owning world, they did not see and did not want anyone, ever, being above the law. John Adams, in 1774 wrote that here, in America, "we are a government of laws, not of men". He wrote about the inequity of inherited leadership. He wrote that a republic, as he saw America at that time, that a republic, where "the people have a voice in making" is in contrast to having an empire, because an empire is ruled by "a despot, bound by no law or limitation but his own will."

My patients, pretty much all of them, even the Republican ones, came in upset by this immunity decision. There are a few patients that I regularly talk politics with, but this week, most of them initiated the conversation. Upset, worried.

One showed me a clip from 1933 Germany when Hitler was appointed Chancellor. He was offered the position but refused until the government gave him the right to rule by presidential decree, in other words, he would be above the law with regard to his acts. And out of that came Kristallnach and the Holocaust.

Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett, Roberts and the infamous Thomas all voted to give our past president immunity. They are all lawyers. They call themselves "originalists", "constitutional scholars", or at least some of them do. They must have read Jefferson, Adams, Hamilton, way deeper than I ever could. They obviously are not thinking clearly, being, as it seems, beholden to a man, an ordinary man, a very ordinary man. For him, they are willing to challenge and overturn 800 years of legal thinking. And we, now, get to pick up the pieces.

Note: a piece I wrote today.