Democrats on Capitol Hill are criticizing the Supreme Court on Monday for its decision to grant presidents immunity for “official” acts, saying it will empower future commanders in chief to break the law with impunity.
Democrats have long argued that under the Constitution, no one — not even the president — is above the law. In ruling that former President Trump is exempt from prosecution for certain actions — possibly including those related to his effort to overturn his 2020 election defeat — the Supreme Court not only defied the intentions of the nation’s founders, critics say, but it also tacitly sanctioned the same dictatorial powers against which they revolted.
“This Supreme Court decision today is a sham and perhaps the most dangerous judicial opinion from our Supreme Court in generations,” said Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.). “Through soft and naive legal language, these partisan judges have created a framework for a President to commit whatever acts he or she chooses… This opinion is nothing less than a blueprint for a lawless dictator to take root in the Oval Office of the White House . ”
Other Democrats issued similarly stern warnings.
“Today is a dark day for American democracy,” said Rep. Dan Goldman (DN.Y.), a former federal prosecutor. “The Supreme Court’s ruling grants broad immunity to a corrupt president who seeks to use acts within his official authority to conspire to overturn a lawful election.”
Goldman characterized the ruling as highly partisan, accusing two of the conservative justices — Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito — of defying their legal obligations to recuse themselves from the immunity case due to their ties to Trump and his attempt to remain in power after his defeat in 2020. . Thomas’ wife was a leading figure in the “Stop the Steal” movement, while Alito said his wife was responsible for flying flags related to that campaign outside two of their homes.
“This ruling is perhaps the final nail in the coffin of this rogue Supreme Court’s claim to institutional legitimacy,” Goldman said.
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) used similar language when questioning the court’s impartiality.
“The Supreme Court has been put on trial with this decision – and its credibility has been further diminished in the eyes of all those who believe in the rule of law,” she said.
The outrage arose after the Supreme Court – in its final opinion of the current term – ruled on Monday that former presidents enjoy a presumption of criminal immunity for official acts while in the White House. The decision marked a major victory for Trump, who requested full immunity in the federal case accusing him of four separate crimes related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results and his role in the violence at the US Capitol on January 6. . 2021, performed by a crowd of his supporters.
Trump and his GOP allies say Trump is just a victim of a “weaponized” Justice Department under President Biden, as the two vie for the White House in a rematch of the 2020 race.
“Hyperpartisan prosecutors like Jack Smith cannot use the rule of law as a weapon to go after the administration’s chief political rival, and we hope the left stops its attacks on President Trump and defends democratic norms,” said Rep. Jim Jordan (R- Ohio). , chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, wrote on the social platform X.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) delivered a similar message, saying the ruling is a “defeat” for Biden’s “weaponized” DOJ.
“This decision is based on the obviously unique power and position of the presidency and complies with the Constitution and common sense,” said Johnson, a former constitutional lawyer who created the legal framework to challenge the results of the 2020 election. President Trump has said repeatedly, the American people, not President Biden’s bureaucrats, will decide the November 5 election.”
The justices, however, stopped short of specifying whether Trump’s efforts regarding the Jan. 6 riot constitute official or unofficial acts — the majority merely said that his “core constitutional powers” are protected — sending that question back. to a lower court, in a move that likely delays the former president’s trial beyond the November elections.
With that in mind, some Democrats said the outrage over Monday’s decision is premature.
“Don’t panic about Trump’s immunity case,” said Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), who served as impeachment manager for Trump’s impeachment after the Jan. 6 riot. wrote on X. “Jack Smith will argue that Trump’s actions were not ‘official acts.’ There is precedent for this in a J6 civil case *which I know a thing or two about* that was unanimously upheld by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. This is not a Trump victory.”
However, Swalwell’s message was a lonely one on Monday, as most Democrats warned that by failing to define what constitutes an official act, the Supreme Court raised more questions than it answered.
“An essential part of presidential powers is that there is immunity for official acts, but the vagueness of the immunity standard established in the ruling is deeply troubling,” Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colorado) said in a statement. “It would be difficult to argue that creating a mob to overturn the election is part of the president’s ‘official duties’.”
The Democratic criticism echoed those of the three liberal justices who dissented from Monday’s ruling. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who wrote the dissent that the other two liberal justices joined, said, “In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law.”
House Democrats moved quickly to turn their anger into action, envisioning vague — and some ambitious — efforts to rein in what they see as Supreme Court overreach. The message is similar to their reaction after the Supreme Court, in another landmark decision, overturned Roe v. Wade. Wade, ending the almost 50-year-old constitutional right to abortion.
“No one, including the twice-impeached former president, should be above the law,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (DN.Y.) said in a statement. “House Democrats will engage in aggressive oversight and legislative activity regarding the Supreme Court to ensure that the far-right justices, in the majority, are brought into compliance with the Constitution.”
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (DN.Y.) wrote on social media site that she would introduce articles of impeachment when lawmakers returned to Washington.
“The Supreme Court has been consumed by a corruption crisis beyond its control. Today’s decision represents an attack on American democracy. It is up to Congress to defend our nation from this authoritarian capture,” she said.
Pascrell, however, renewed the long-standing effort to expand the number of justices on the Supreme Court, writing, “I support expanding the Republican Supreme Court because it is the surest way to finally balance this corrupt, right-wing body.”
“I ask my colleagues to support the expansion,” he added.
This story originally appeared on thehill.com read the full story
