 This is a question about presidential immunity, and the Supreme Court actually tapped the issue of the unconstitutional nature of Jack Smith's appointment. Clarence Thomas and his concurrent said exactly that. We don't think he was constitutionally appointed per Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution. So the justices knew what they were doing. They actually sort of referenced that. But the bigger issue now is that we have binding Supreme Court precedent. The outer perimeter of a president's authority—