Da Caller, Supreme Court Rules Trump Has ‘Absolute Immunity’ From Prosecution For Official Acts
The Supreme Court ruled on former President Donald Trump’s immunity appeal, finding that presidents have immunity from criminal prosecution for “official acts” taken in office.
Trump’s appeal, which seeks to dismiss the case brought by special counsel Jack Smith based on Trump’s claim that he has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his presidency, has long delayed his trial in Washington, D.C., bringing proceedings at the district court to a grinding halt as the Supreme Court sorted out the dispute. Trump was indicted last August on four felony counts relating to alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
“Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority,” the court held in a 6-3 ruling. “And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts.”
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion that the ultimate analysis on which of the allegations in Trump’s indictment are considered official acts subject to immunity is “best left to the lower courts.”
“Certain allegations—such as those involving Trump’s discussions with the Acting Attorney General—are readily categorized in light of the nature of the President’s official relationship to the office held by that individual,” Roberts wrote. “Other allegations—such as those involving Trump’s interactions with the Vice President, state officials, and certain private parties, and his comments to the general public present more difficult questions. ”
Roberts wrote that Trump is “absolutely immune from prosecution for the alleged conduct involving his discussions with Justice Department officials.”
However, Roberts also wrote that Trump asserted “a far broader immunity than the limited one we have recognized.”
“He contends that the indictment must be dismissed because the Impeachment Judgment Clause requires that impeachment and Senate conviction precede a President’s criminal prosecution,” Roberts wrote. “The text of the Clause provides little support for such an absolute immunity.”
About what I expected. Now the lower courts can spend years trying to figure this one out.
No comments:
Post a Comment