@hasani They didn't give "unlimited power". They gave freedom from prosecution. It's essentially a free pass from their branch of government. And obviously the executive would have a free pass from its own branch, so that leaves only the legislative, which can still impeach and convict, but only while the person is still President and only if Congress has the political will.
So, while it is a major stripping of accountability, it's not truly "unlimited power".
@hasani
> With respect, to have no accountability is literally/functionally to have power.
Then that answers your question. The court does not need unlimited power to be able to give it. It just needs to control accountability and choose not to exercise it.
> doesn't congress rely on criminal law f to impeach the president?
As I understand it, no. It's a purely political process. Having a law to point to certainly makes it more likely to succeed, but Congress isn't a court.
@LouisIngenthron With respect, to have no accountability is literally/functionally to have power.
You can apply this as a test with everyday life. An example of this is when we see this with cops on the street (qualified immunity) that are stealing money from people.
But also to your point in regards to Congress, technically “high crimes and misdemeanors” is whatever Congress says they are, but doesn't congress rely on criminal law f to impeach the president?