Supreme Court Poised to Agree With Trump: Former Presidents Are Immune From Some Prosecutions
By Breitbart. A majority of Supreme Court justices sympathized with Donald Trump’s attorneys’ arguments that a president does enjoy some level of immunity that endures past the term of office.
The court heard oral arguments regarding if Trump is immune from prosecution on charges of attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 election, as Special Counsel Jack Smith claims.
A federal trial court ruled in Smith’s favor that Trump is not immune from prosecution, but Smith’s prosecution in D.C. has been on hold until the Supreme Court weighs in, likely in late June.
Arguments revealed that a majority appears to agree that presidents do enjoy some scope of immunity after their term in office, but the ultimate question will be the establishment of a standard.
If the Court institutes a test, it would vacate (i.e., strike) the lower court decision that former presidents have no immunity, sending that case back to trial court. That court would then undergo a painstaking point-by-point analysis on each fact to determine if immunity exists. (Read more from “Supreme Court Poised to Agree With Trump: Former Presidents Are Immune From Some Prosecutions” HERE)
_______________________________________________
Supreme Court Struggles With Immunity for Presidents Over Official Acts
By Washington Times. Supreme Court justices clashed Thursday over former President Donald Trump’s claims of “absolute immunity” from prosecution for his official acts in the White House as they sorted through competing dangers of an unleashed president on the one hand or a crippled commander in chief on the other.
Justices seemed to agree that some presidential conduct is immune from prosecution, but they sparred over where to draw the line and what it would mean for presidents long after Mr. Trump’s case is decided.
“We’re writing a rule for the ages,” said Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, a Trump appointee.
The court’s liberal-leaning justices were the most skeptical of Mr. Trump’s claims.
“The founders did not put an immunity clause in the Constitution,” said Justice Elena Kagan, an Obama appointee. “Not so surprising. They were reacting against a monarch who claimed to be above the law. Wasn’t the whole point the president was not a monarch, and the president was not supposed to be above the law?” (Read more from “Supreme Court Struggles With Immunity for Presidents Over Official Acts” HERE)
Photo credit: Flickr
