On Monday, the US Supreme Court ruled that Donald Trump cannot be prosecuted for his official actions as president, but can be prosecuted for private actions. This landmark decision marks the first recognition of any form of presidential immunity from prosecution.
The justices, in a 6-3 decision written by Chief Justice John Roberts, rejected the lower court’s ruling. Earlier, the lower court had dismissed Trump’s claims of immunity from criminal prosecution related to his efforts to overturn the controversial outcome of the 2020 election against Joe Biden.
The Supreme Court’s six conservative justices, including three appointed by Trump, formed the majority, while three liberal justices dissented.
Roberts wrote, “Our conclusion is that the nature of the president’s powers under our Constitution requires a former president to have certain criminal immunity for his official acts during his term in office.”
Roberts added, “At least in the exercise of the core constitutional powers granted to the president, such immunity must be absolute; as for his other official acts, he also has the right to immunity.”
Roberts said that Trump’s case will be remanded to the lower courts for further review.
The Supreme Court analyzed four categories of behavior mentioned in the charges against Trump: his discussions with Justice Department officials after the 2020 election; allegations of pressuring then-Vice President Mike Pence to block certification of Biden’s win; his role in convening a false pro-Trump elector group; and his actions related to the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack.
The court found that Trump has absolute immunity regarding his conversations with Justice Department officials but remanded the case to determine if he has immunity in the other three categories of conversations.
This ruling signifies the first time in US history since the 18th century that the Supreme Court has declared that a former president can be immune from criminal charges in any circumstance.
The decision came as Trump appealed the lower court’s rejection of his immunity claim. The court made the ruling on the last day of the session.
Liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a sharp dissent, calling the majority’s decision a mockery of the fundamental principles of our Constitution and government system, that no one is above the law.
She added, “The court relied on its own mistaken interpretation of the President’s need to take bold and unhesitant action, granting former President Trump all the immunity he requested, and even more.”
Trump argued that he could not be prosecuted because he was serving as president when he took the actions later charged. Special Counsel Smith opposed the view that the president can be immune from prosecution based on the principle that no one is above the law.
During the arguments on April 25, Trump’s legal team urged the justices to fully protect the former president from criminal charges for his official actions during his term, known as “absolute immunity.” Trump’s lawyers argued that without immunity, a sitting president would face political opponents’ blackmail and extortion as they would be under threat of future prosecution.
In the debate, the justices raised hypothetical questions involving the president selling nuclear secrets, accepting bribes, or ordering a coup or political assassination. Trump’s lawyers argued that if these actions were part of official duties, then a former president could only be charged after being impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate, which has never happened in US history.
A lawyer from the Special Counsel’s Office told the Supreme Court during the arguments that the “absolute immunity” sought by Trump would shield the president from criminal responsibility for bribery, treason, incitement of rebellion, murder, and in this case, attempting to overturn a fair election result and retain power.
(Reference: Report by Reuters)