In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court has ruled that former President Donald Trump has limited immunity for his official acts while in office. The ruling, delivered by Chief Justice John Roberts, underscores the necessity of immunity for presidents to perform their duties without fear of criminal prosecution. However, the decision also makes clear that this immunity is not all-encompassing.

 

Chief Justice Roberts articulated the court’s reasoning: “We conclude that under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of presidential power requires that a former president have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure in office. At least with respect to the president’s exercise of his core constitutional powers, this immunity must be absolute.” This statement affirms the need to protect the executive branch's independence, ensuring that a president can execute their duties effectively without constant legal threats.

 

However, Roberts emphasized that not all presidential actions are protected. “The President enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official. The President is not above the law. But Congress may not criminalize the President’s conduct in carrying out the responsibilities of the Executive Branch under the Constitution.” This distinction is crucial, as it maintains the principle that no one, not even the president, is above the law.

 

The ruling has immediate implications for the ongoing legal proceedings against Trump, particularly in relation to the events of January 6. CNN's chief legal correspondent Paula Reid noted that the decision opens the door for further litigation, potentially delaying the case until after the upcoming presidential election. “The fact that the Supreme Court has opened the door for further proceedings for further litigation makes it unlikely that this will go before November. And the reason why that is significant is because if Trump is reelected, he can make this case and the classified documents case go away,” Reid explained.

 

The Supreme Court’s decision requires lower courts to determine which of Trump’s actions qualify as official and which do not. As Chief Justice Roberts stated, “We accordingly remand to the District Court to determine in the first instance — with the benefit of briefing we lack — whether Trump’s conduct in this area qualifies as official or unofficial.” Roberts criticized the previous lower court opinions for their lack of “factual analysis,” underscoring the need for a detailed examination of Trump’s actions.

 

In response to the ruling, Trump celebrated it as a significant victory. He took to Truth Social, proclaiming, “BIG WIN FOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND DEMOCRACY. PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!” This reaction reflects Trump’s interpretation of the ruling as a validation of his actions while in office and a reinforcement of the constitutional protections afforded to presidents.

 

Conversely, the Biden campaign quickly issued a statement downplaying the significance of the ruling in terms of Trump’s overall conduct. “Donald Trump snapped after he lost the 2020 election and encouraged a mob to overthrow the results of a free and fair election,” a senior campaign adviser said. “Trump is already running for president as a convicted felon for the very same reason he sat idly by while the mob violently attacked the Capitol: he thinks he’s above the law and is willing to do anything to gain and hold onto power for himself.”

 

The ruling also embraced one of Trump’s key arguments regarding the potential impact of such prosecutions on the presidency. Chief Justice Roberts expressed concern that prosecuting a former president for their official acts could deter future presidents from making decisions based on the public interest. “A president inclined to take one course of action based on the public interest may instead opt for another, apprehensive that criminal penalties may befall him upon his departure from office,” Roberts wrote. He warned that such scrutiny could undermine “the independence of the executive branch.”

 

This Supreme Court decision, while providing Trump with some legal relief, also sets a precedent for future considerations of presidential conduct and immunity. It reinforces the need for a balance between protecting the executive branch's independence and ensuring accountability for actions that fall outside the scope of official duties. As the lower courts now take on the task of examining the specifics of Trump’s conduct, the implications of this ruling will continue to unfold, potentially influencing the broader landscape of presidential accountability in the United States.

 

Credit: CNN 2024-07-01

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

In short - Immune = official acts. Not immune - unofficial acts. 

 

Devil in the detail? Endless arguments about what constitutes an official act. 

 

After the Chevron decision last week, Congress is going to have to seriously get its act together as there more holes in administrative US law than Swiss cheese. 

 

 

 

 

 

The Jan 6 imbroglio looks dead in the water. Presidents are allowed to discuss certification with their VP as its an official act. However, the VP has sole responsibility as President of the Senate. 

 

SCOTUS ruled that lower courts can't guess motivations for official conversations. 

 

This is a cluster****. Never mind Trump, every President is now at risk of mendacious litigation after leaving office. Banana Republic comes to mind. 

Official acts of the executive branch is most certainly immune from prosecution.  It is after all a one of the three branches of government. But the idiots in the DOJ for whatever reason don’t seem to understand constitutional law. 

Its a good day yet again for Trump &

a bad day for  THE DOJ weaponization   of Jack Smith & bidens executive branch !

 

Long live the king without clothing !

God bless 45/47.

 

 

methinks

 

 

9 minutes ago, riclag said:

methinks

 

Still not convinced of that.

The court didn't rule on anything specific to Trump. It means Biden won't be prosecuted when he leaves for whatever they sign up as well. The ruling was for all presidents. Obama are you out there?

6 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

The court didn't rule on anything specific to Trump. It means Biden won't be prosecuted when he leaves for whatever they sign up as well. The ruling was for all presidents. Obama are you out there?

Its a crucial decision to protect the separation of powers, the presidency and country .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

16 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

The court didn't rule on anything specific to Trump. It means Biden won't be prosecuted when he leaves for whatever they sign up as well. The ruling was for all presidents. Obama are you out there?

…& Obama doesn’t have to worry about being charged and prosecuted for authorizing drone strikes killing Americans 

7 minutes ago, novacova said:

…& Obama doesn’t have to worry about being charged and prosecuted for authorizing drone strikes killing Americans 

Still waiting for the  100 page decision to digest in the stomachs of Pro Republic experts!

 

Much to unpack & understand!

 

methinks

 

It was expected that they would find a way to delay the trial. It will take time to sort it out....

 

As Roberts stated: "The President enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official. The President is not above the law."

 

 

44 minutes ago, candide said:

It was expected that they would find a way to delay the trial. It will take time to sort it out....

 

As Roberts stated: "The President enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official. The President is not above the law."

 

 

 

So the notion that he can shoot someone on 5th Avenue and get away with it is now void. But we all knew that. 

 

I've always thought impeachment was the constitutional answer. It's tragic that became a political football. 

Sorry Jack!

Cannon hasn’t made a decision on if 

Jack Smith hiring ,is legal. If you remember former AGMeese filed a amicus brief arguing that he must be duly appointed by law. That being said ,Only Congress makes laws .

In a separate opinion from the Immunity case Judge Thomas wrote:

 

"If this unprecedented prosecution is to proceed, it must be conducted by someone duly authorized to do so by the American people. The lower courts should thus answer these essential questions concerning the special counsel's appointment before proceeding," Thomas added.

 

https://www.newsweek.com/clarence-thomas-jack-smith-supreme-court-ruling-donald-trump-immunity-1919643

Another blow against democracy delivered by this court this ruling works just fine if a man of morals is in office what happens if trump gets back in?slaughtering of protesters who don’t like him?+ it delays him being tryed for his coup attempt 

The title of this article is factually wrong and misleading.

 

The president's immunity is for official acts of government while in office.

 

Encouraging a mob to storm the capitol and kill the vice president isn't an act of government.

So there is no partial immunity in the Jan 6th case.

Whats left of jacks case in DC is going back down to Judge Chutkin as a result of the SCOTUS Immunity  decisions.

Her opinion from what seems like a eternity!

 

“Former Presidents enjoy no special conditions on their federal criminal liability,” Chutkan wrote. “Defendant may be subject to federal investigation, indictment, prosecution, conviction, and punishment for any criminal acts undertaken while in office.”

 

https://whyy.org/articles/supreme-court-trump-immunity-decision/

3 hours ago, Tug said:

Another blow against democracy delivered by this court this ruling works just fine if a man of morals is in office what happens if trump gets back in?slaughtering of protesters who don’t like him?+ it delays him being tryed for his coup attempt 

 

Where you bin? You're late!

6 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Where you bin? You're late!

Yea kind odd I care about my country ehh?

W-T-F has happened to the once great and once sane USA❓Guess Biden just has to stage a successful coup now, have all his political adversaries killed or incarcerated, crown himself king and never give up power. Could also then dismantle the insane unSupreme Court to achieve absolute power with no repercussions. 

 

Such an embarrassment, bad joke and laughing stock The USA has become. Sad. 

52 minutes ago, Tug said:

Yea kind odd I care about my country ehh?

If you really cared you would be campaigning for the dems to come up with a party platform good for Americans... you don't even know what their party platform is... I will give you the answer so you don't stumble around trying to find it... they have none... their whole existence is on beating trump... where is a controlled border???... where is a net raise in income for middle America???... where are the ev stations???...  Where are the sustainable alternative energy sources they promise???... where is affordable healthcare???... They are failing the heartbeat middle Americans at every turn...  

2 minutes ago, Skipalongcassidy said:

If you really cared you would be campaigning for the dems to come up with a party platform good for Americans... you don't even know what their party platform is... I will give you the answer so you don't stumble around trying to find it... they have none... their whole existence is on beating trump... where is a controlled border???... where is a net raise in income for middle America???... where are the ev stations???...  Where are the sustainable alternative energy sources they promise???... where is affordable healthcare???... They are failing the heartbeat middle Americans at every turn...  

8 years of "climate crisis" and woke stuff. Hillary and Joe the 2 worst candidates ever. Democrats lying non stop. 

6 hours ago, candide said:

It was expected that they would find a way to delay the trial. It will take time to sort it out....

 

As Roberts stated: "The President enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official. The President is not above the law."

 

 

Roberts also stated... and this is the crux of what the democraptic party cannot get their minds around... 

 

 "But Congress may not criminalize the President’s conduct in carrying out the responsibilities of the Executive Branch under the Constitution. And the system of separated powers designed by the Framers has always demanded an energetic, independent Executive"

Biden family was told in 2019 Joe had dementia. Msm covered for him, Democrats lied non stop. These people are so bad. All crooks. All owned by big pharma etc.

58 minutes ago, susanlea said:

Biden family was told in 2019 Joe had dementia. Msm covered for him, Democrats lied non stop. These people are so bad. All crooks. All owned by big pharma etc.

I have only made a cursory read through of a summary of the Supreme Courts opinion.

 

I must have missed their conclusions on President Biden's mental health, and the role of the Pharmaceutical Industry.

1 hour ago, Skipalongcassidy said:

The President enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official. The President is not above the law

Seems like a sensible ruling. The lower courts will work out over time the details of what's 'official' and what isn't.

 

The world changes, events happen, and the law evolves. Just as it should.

1 hour ago, Skeptic7 said:

W-T-F has happened to the once great and once sane USA❓Guess Biden just has to stage a successful coup now, have all his political adversaries killed or incarcerated, crown himself king and never give up power. Could also then dismantle the insane unSupreme Court to achieve absolute power with no repercussions. 

 

Such an embarrassment, bad joke and laughing stock The USA has become. Sad. 

Biden for King? Serves the Yanks right for getting rid of the Brits. Only the Sovereign is above the law in the UK, we can (and do) prosecute any other Royal or politician for any provable crime.

 

But a country considering re electing a madman and only opposing him with a geriatric probably deserves all they get.

Good to see the adults back in the room.

 

A wise ruling. 

10 hours ago, Social Media said:

the Supreme Court has ruled that former President Donald Trump has limited immunity for his official acts while in office.

 

10 hours ago, Social Media said:

the nature of presidential power requires that a former president have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure in office

 

Out of office , not president anymore = no immunity .

9 hours ago, riclag said:

Still waiting for the  100 page decision to digest in the stomachs of Pro Republic experts!

 

Much to unpack & understand!

 

methinks

 

AKA, I will wait for Fox et alia to convert the facts of the ruling into misinformation and conspiracy theories before I spread their propaganda as instructed as I am unable to think for myself.

Nixon was right...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMt8qCl5fPk

 

 

 

And Mitch McConnell was wrong...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5-lOAvnxfs