What, exactly, would an "illegal order" look like?

[intrepidity]

Since SCOTUS has declared that *everything* POTUS does while acting in the role of POTUS cannot later be adjudicated (ergo, is de facto "legal" ) then what, pray tell, would an "illegal order" look like?

"If the president does it, it is not illegal."

So what are these "illegal orders" that some are expecting/hoping military command will resist?

[Silent Type]

1. Don't think the "immunity" ruling means that. If trump say ordered Medicare ended, he would be prevented from doing that

unless Congress passes such laws. That's not likely to happen since even GOPers aren't going to pick up mom's or grandparents' medical costs.

[speak easy]

2. What, exactly, would an "illegal order" look like? Example: Live fire on peaceful protestors.

[sarisataka]

3. Easy, the President has immunity for giving an illegal order (according to some)

The people carrying out said order do not have immunity for any actions they take. Therefore any order which would subject the person to criminal charges under US law or crimes against humanity is "illegal".

There were some big trials in Europe back in 1945-46 that established "I was just following orders" is not a valid defense to criminal charges.

[Hugin]

4. There's the answer to this question...

And also the key to why Trump is nominating empty suits with baggage and a phone number. They WILL try to implement his bidding. However, the successful implementation of his scheme depends on enough below them not being clear on their own liabilities and responsibilities.

If the people who actually make things happen are clear on who they truly represent, then Trump is a turtle on a post.