The Supreme Court of the United States released, this Monday (1st), a decision determining that former President Donald Trump has limited presidential immunity in relation to acts taken while occupying the Oval Office of the White House.
With this, the Republican can claim criminal immunity for some of the actions he took in the final days of his presidency – in a decision that will likely further delay the trial he faces on federal criminal charges of trying to overturn the result of the 2020 election.
The ruling split the Court on a 6-3 vote. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the decision reflecting the majority. The three liberal justices dissented as a group.
That decision — which was seen as the most closely watched case before the court this year — rejects a lower court decision by a federal appeals court in February that found Trump did not enjoy immunity for alleged crimes he committed during his presidency. to reverse the results of the 2020 elections.
“We conclude that, under our constitutional framework of separate powers, the nature of presidential power requires that a former president have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts while in office,” Roberts wrote in Monday’s opinion.
“At least with regard to the exercise of the president’s main constitutional powers, this immunity must be absolute,” he added.
“The president does not enjoy immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the president does is official. The president is not above the law,” Roberts added.
The chief justice said the lower court will have to evaluate which of Trump’s alleged conduct is immune under the new guidelines determined by the high court, and the opinion said additional instructions will be needed for the lower court to do so.
“Consequently, we remand the case to the District Court to determine in the first instance whether Trump’s conduct in this area qualifies as official or unofficial,” wrote Roberts, who said there had been a lack of “factual analysis” in previous lower court opinions. rejecting Trump’s immunity.
Justice Sotomayor, writing on behalf of the other two liberal justices, said in a strongly worded dissent that the court’s decision “makes a mockery of the principle, fundamental to our Constitution and system of government, that no man is above the law.”
“Afraid for our democracy, I disagree,” Sotomayor wrote.
“When he uses his official powers in any way, according to the majority’s reasoning, he will now be exempt from criminal prosecution. Order Navy SEAL Team Six to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organize a military coup to maintain power? Immune. Accept bribes in exchange for forgiveness? Immune. Immune, immune, immune,” Sotomayor wrote.
“Let the president break the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil purposes. Because if he knew that one day he might be held accountable for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be. This is the message of the majority [da Corte] today,” he added.
“Even if these nightmare scenarios never come to fruition, and I pray they never do, the damage has already been done. The relationship between the president and the people he serves has changed irrevocably. In every use of official power, the president is now a king above the law,” he concluded.
Share:
