Supreme Court Rules in Trump Immunity Case

By Dustin Rowles | Politics | July 1, 2024 |

By Dustin Rowles | Politics | July 1, 2024 |

The Supreme Court has delivered its decision on Presidential immunity, ruling as many believed they would: That the President does have “absolute immunity” for official acts, but there is no immunity for unofficial acts.
“Under our constitutional structure of separated powers,” the Supreme Court majority wrote, “the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts.”

The ruling isn’t surprising. The Supreme Court essentially gave Donald Trump what he wanted, classifying his discussions with the Department of Justice over whether to replace certain States’ electors with his own slate as an official act that is immune and his discussions with Vice President Pence to not certify the Electoral College as presumptively immune. They sent it back to the lower court to decide if the presumption could be rebutted.
Frustratingly, the Court also remanded to the lower court questions about whether the actions he took with others to instigate the January 6th attack on the Capitol, meaning that it will take several more months to sort that out. By that time, Trump may be the President again and will be able to pardon himself.

The standards by which lower courts should determine what is and is not an official act heavily favor the President. SCOTUS ruled that “official acts” extend even to the “outer perimeter” of the President’s official responsibilities, covering actions that are “not manifestly or palpably beyond [his] authority.” The Court said that covers “most” of the President’s public communications and that lower courts — importantly — cannot inquire into the President’s motives when deciding whether an act is official or not, and that just because the act may generally violate the law does not make it “unofficial.”

To get a better idea of how big a win this case is for Donald Trump, look no further than Justice Sotomayor’s dissent:

“When [the president] uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune. Let the President violate the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends. Because if he knew that he may one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be. That is the majority’s message today. Even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do, the damage has been done. The relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law …

… Today’s decision to grant former Presidents criminal immunity reshapes the institution of the Presidency. It makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that no man is above the law. Relying on little more than its own misguided wisdom about the need for ‘bold and unhesitating action’ by the President … the Court gives former President Trump all the immunity he asked for and more. Because our Constitution does not shield a former President from answering for criminal and treasonous acts, I dissent.”

Should Trump win again in November, the ruling basically gives him carte blanche to do whatever he wants to do, and as long as he conspires with government officials (i.e., his allies), he’s free to do as he wishes without fear of prosecution.