Trump has immunity from prosecution for official acts Supreme Court rules in monumental decision for presidential powers
The President of the United States is immune from prosecution for official actions while in office. The Supreme Court decided this in a monumental ruling with major consequences for the powers of the president and the criminal cases against Donald Trump.
The case centered on special counsel Jack Smith’s prosecution of Trump for allegedly masterminding efforts to overturn the 2020 election while he was still in office, including on January 6.
The ex-president’s team argued that Trump, and any other president, should be absolutely immune from prosecution for actions he took while in office, otherwise it could hamper important decision-making.
The 6-3 decision split along the court’s ideological lines ensures that Trump will not face another major trial before the November election, as the case is sent back to a lower court to determine what if his “official” versus “unofficial actions is considered.
“The President has no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official. The President is not above the law,” the justices, led by Chief Justice John Roberts, wrote in the majority.
Donald Trump is the first former president to be convicted of a crime. He is charged in three other criminal cases, including one involving efforts to undo the 2020 interference in Washington, D.C.
“But under our system of separation of powers, the President may not be sued for exercising his core constitutional powers, and he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for his official acts. That immunity applies equally to all occupants of the Oval Office.”
Trump celebrated the decision, writing on Truth Social: “BIG VICTORY FOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND DEMOCRACY. PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!”
The Supreme Court’s historic ruling could also have implications for the two other pending criminal charges against Trump — for his alleged mishandling of classified documents and for his efforts to undermine the Georgia election.
Roberts’ majority opinion continues: “At a minimum, the President should be immune from prosecution for an official act unless the administration can demonstrate that applying a criminal prohibition to that act would not create ‘dangers of infringement on the authority and functions of the executive branch.'”
The Supreme Court currently has a conservative majority of six to three justices, three of whom were nominated by Trump during his time in office.
The Biden campaign responded to the Supreme Court’s decision on immunity with a statement from a senior campaign adviser.
“Today’s ruling does not change the facts, so let’s be very clear about what happened on January 6: Donald Trump snapped after losing the 2020 election and encouraged a mob to overturn the results of a free and fair election to throw.’
Lawyers representing the special counsel had argued that a president can be charged with crimes while in office, and that no official has absolute immunity.
The decision comes as Trump faces criminal charges in three criminal cases and has already been found guilty of Last month, 34 cases of corporate data falsification were identified in New York.
He is the first former president ever convicted of a crime.
During oral arguments that included some wild conjecture, the justices appeared to reject granting absolute immunity to presidents, but their questioning suggested they could delay Trump’s trial while he runs for president for a third time.
Liberal judges feared that full immunity for ruling presidents would be no different from appointing a king who would have the power to stage a military coup or assassinate political opponents.
Conservative justices indicated they wanted to provide at least some legal safeguards to protect Trump and future presidents from political prosecution.
Arguing on behalf of the special counsel, Michael Dreeben asserted that there are some presidential actions that are not criminalizable and involve “core” constitutional powers specifically outlined in Article II, such as the power to grant pardons, appoint to recognize and veto foreign nations.
Trump is accused of attempting to undermine the 2020 election, including the attack on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Conservative justices appeared to suggest that the fraud and conspiracy laws Trump charged in the Jan. 6 election interference case are too broad.
The Supreme Court case stems from Smith’s case against Trump, which was filed in Washington DC.
Trump is accused of attempting to overturn the 2020 election, including the attack on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.
He faces four charges, including conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction or attempted obstruction of an official proceeding and conspiracy to violate rights.
It is probably the most serious of the four cases against the ex-president.
Special Counsel Jack Smith has charged former President Trump with the January 6 attack on the US Capitol and efforts to overturn the 2020 election
District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is overseeing the case, and the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit both ruled that Trump is not immune from prosecution.
While the lower courts awaited the Supreme Court’s decision, Chutkan previously assured Trump that he would have two months to prepare for the trial before it would go ahead.
The current United States Supreme Court has a six-to-three conservative majority
It appears the case could be heard in September at the earliest, when the 2024 campaign gets underway.
Trump also faces criminal charges in Florida over secret documents and in Georgia over election interference.