On July 1st, the US Supreme Court ruled by a vote of 6-3 that the president has absolute immunity for carrying out his core constitutional powers, as well as implied immunity for other official acts, but no immunity for personal actions. This decision will not only benefit former President Trump but also apply to all future presidents, including current President Biden, once they leave office. Legal experts believe that presidential immunity ensures the balance and stability of the three branches of the US government, which is beneficial to the country’s long-term interests.
Former US Attorney General Bill Barr stated that the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity was wise and in the long-term interest of the country. Although Barr served in the Trump administration as Attorney General for a period, he resigned due to political differences with Trump, leaning more towards the Republican establishment.
In an interview with Fox News, Barr expressed his approval of the Supreme Court’s decision, emphasizing the importance of writing an “eternal opinion” that covers all future scenarios rather than focusing solely on current specific cases.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion that absolute immunity is necessary for the president’s exercise of core constitutional powers. However, Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented strongly, arguing that granting Trump immunity for official acts could shield him entirely from criminal responsibility, potentially allowing for extreme abuses of power.
Disagreeing with Sotomayor’s dissent, Barr dismissed her arguments as “false horror stories,” stating that the examples given were baseless and that the president does not have the authority to carry out criminal acts under the guise of official duties. This ruling by the High Court is expected to delay the trial in two federal criminal cases against Trump until further analysis is conducted regarding his actions.
President Biden criticized the Supreme Court’s decision, labeling it a dangerous precedent that could allow presidents to act with impunity. Despite the ruling applying to all presidents, Biden voiced concerns about the potential abuse of power without legal constraints.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer condemned the ruling, calling it a sad day for American democracy. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, on the other hand, viewed the decision as a sensible application of constitutional principles and dismissed concerns about future presidents abusing immunity as absurd and irrational.
Former White House lawyer Ty Cobb supported the Supreme Court’s ruling, stating that separation of powers is a fundamental aspect of the US Constitution and should be upheld. Cobb critiqued Sotomayor for not sufficiently addressing the issue of the separation of powers in her dissenting opinion.
Looking ahead, Cobb anticipates that the Supreme Court will establish boundaries regarding a president’s official and unofficial actions, allowing for the continuation of litigation against Trump. Despite differing opinions, all parties involved agree on the importance of upholding constitutional principles and the rule of law in the face of presidential immunity.