That doesn't really change much. The president can kill the members of the opposing party, and then just pardon the assassins. Who's then going to sue him?
Nation state level threats are kind of a final boss irl and in the cybersecurity realm, so I’m not sure what you want me to say. That’s a problem for Citizen Lab, Google Project Zero, and natsec but if someone individually is at risk of this happening, they need a lawyer and an insurance policy, and possibly private security, but tbh they have bigger problems like being on a naughty list. I honestly don’t think this something you can expect to move the needle on for the >99% of people who don’t have this problem.
What do you think a defense against this would even look like? To attempt to do so sounds almost absurd because it’s just such a remote possibility.
> What do you think a defense against this would even look like? To attempt to do so sounds almost absurd because it’s just such a remote possibility.
Stronger constitutional limits. For example, pardons should not be a thing that could be done unilaterally. Ideally, they shouldn't be a thing at all.
At the same time, the Constitution needs to be a bit more malleable. The Amendment process is notoriously hard, and the US Senate structure is uniquely unamendable.
