Jackson (page 98) lays out why this is such a dangerous thing.
Essentially, the court has said that the president is immune if the crimes are carried out as "official" acts. Only "unofficial" acts can be prosecuted.
The trouble is, what constitutes "official" vs "unofficial" has been left extremely vague (and by their own admission probably unsolvable), and so only the Supreme Court can decide which is which on a case-by-case basis.
Therefore, the Supreme Court now decides when and if the president is accountable for any criminal actions, and the judiciary and congress can do nothing about it. This is in stark contrast to how the law applies to everyone else.
Essentially, the court has said that the president is immune if the crimes are carried out as "official" acts. Only "unofficial" acts can be prosecuted.
The trouble is, what constitutes "official" vs "unofficial" has been left extremely vague (and by their own admission probably unsolvable), and so only the Supreme Court can decide which is which on a case-by-case basis.
Therefore, the Supreme Court now decides when and if the president is accountable for any criminal actions, and the judiciary and congress can do nothing about it. This is in stark contrast to how the law applies to everyone else.