The Supreme Court ruled Monday in Trump v. United States that a former president has substantial immunity from prosecution for official acts committed in office. However, not for unofficial acts.
The Court sent the matter back to a lower court. The justices did not apply the ruling to whether or not former President Trump is immune from prosecution regarding actions related to alleged efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
Jonathan Turley
‘A Win For President Trump’: Jonathan Turley Says SCOTUS Immunity Ruling Is Blow To Jack Smith pic.twitter.com/uBQpcDslEn
— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) July 1, 2024
The question stemmed from Special Counsel Jack Smith’s federal election interference case in charging President Trump with conspiracy to defraud the United States. The charges are conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of an attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights.
Those charges stem from Smith’s months-long investigation into whether Trump was involved in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot and any alleged interference in the 2020 election result.
Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges. He argued he should be immune from prosecution for official acts committed by the president of the United States.
BUT Trump is "presumptively immune" from prosecution for his attempt to pressure Pence to halt the certification of the Electoral College votes. That presumption can be rebutted. https://t.co/I41tdhS33a
— Katie Buehler (@bykatiebuehler) July 1, 2024
It was the usual 6-3 decision in a matter like this.
Breaking! The Supreme Court holds that a former president has absolute immunity for his core constitutional powers. pic.twitter.com/GtiRbWUXxj
— Media Research Center (@theMRC) July 1, 2024
BREAKING: President Trump GRANTED Immunity by SCOTUS!
“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… pic.twitter.com/fLeylYY9rG
— Paul Ingrassia (@PaulIngrassia) July 1, 2024
An illegally assigned prosecutor illegally prosecuted Trump. Trump’s actions that day, including the speeches and other messages to protesters, are official acts, and none of that involved an obstruction of congress. Smith is humiliated. The SC chastised lower courts for not examining the cases in detail, to determine which acts may not be official, calling their decisions overly expedited. ACB… Read more »
Thomas questions the validity of a “private citizen” as a “Special Counsel” and whether it has been “established by law”. Furthermore, “A private citizen cannot criminally prosecute anyone, let alone a former President“.
How about Biden being charged for his “conspiracy” to interfere with 2024 election, via the lawfare he’s waging against President Trump. Then there’s Joe hiding & lying about his dementia, which could have him charged with “conspiracy” to defraud the United States.