The Supreme Court’s Presidential Immunity Ruling is primarily tied to the infamous constitutional idea of a separation of powers. The ruling evolved over time through judicial interpretation (there was not a specific court case that determined this ruling, per se). However, specific cases did circumscribe this ruling.
The Supreme Court Case Nixon v. Fitzgerald of 1982 ultimately granted presidents with immunity when it came to civil damages that were taken when said president was in office. This was meant to allow the president the means to take action as they see fit without fears of constant litigation (lawsuits). However, the 1997 case Clinton v. Jones restricted presidential immunity, asserting that the immunity ruling does not expand past actions taken outside of official duties. This case unanimously ruled the acceptance of presidential litigation for actions unrelated to official presidential responsibilities.
However, recently, Trump seems to be asserting pushback against these parameters. “Trump moved to dismiss the indictment based on Presidential immunity, arguing that a President has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions performed within the outer perimeter of his official responsibilities, and that the indictment’s allegations fell within the core of his official duties”. Though this idea was soon refuted, there is some truth in the matter. When it comes down to it, Trump’s immunity could allow him the power and will to take more extreme actions with such protection. “The Supreme Court ruled in July that former presidents largely cannot be prosecuted based on their official acts in office, though they can still face charges for acts that were outside the scope of their official duties”.
The past few years, Trump has undergone several investigations regarding the accusation of illegally retaining classified documents after leaving office, conspiring to overturn the 2020 election, actions which in part may have led to the January 6th attack on the Capitol, business fraud, and so on. This essentially means that whatever allegations these investigations came to, so long as they were within official presidential business, Trump is protected from. Ultimately, this complicates other prosecutions Trump is currently facing, as presidential immunity may slow down prosecution processes.
Ultimately, the Presidential Immunity Ruling will give Trump power and protection as he enters his second presidential term, as well as set back ongoing investigations as parameters of the ruling are still being solidified.
Sources:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf
15 comments:
Whenever people would say things like, "I can't believe a convicted felon can become president," I always agreed, because how could that possibly be legal or just in any way. But after reading this article, I've realized the length the government can go to to protect the president, and I'm completely appalled that rules like these are allowed to be in place. If we frown upon convicted felons getting jobs, then why is one able to become president? And seeing how these rulings can utilize loopholes, like how Trump is protected from his allegations as long as they were "within official presidential business," worries me for what else he and other members of government that side with him are capable of. Will he be able to abolish the two-term limit, acting on his dictator-like wishes? I hope not.
Based on how this plays out, it seems that Trump may face charges, but will definitely be substantially protected by presidential immunity. I wonder what punishments he may face, and with the Republican Congress and Supreme Court, if he will face them at all. I also wonder what kind of precedent this sets for future Presidents. I think there must be more of a restriction to the powers of presidential immunity — hopefully a case will be brought up in support of this as Trump still faces his charges.
Clearly Trump is willing to bend the rules to put himself in more power, and I believe that this could be really scary for the rest of the country. He completely defies the democratic norms of our country bypassing checks and balances. Where will Donald Trump stop, how much power is he willing to exert, are all questions that everyone in this country should be asking. I believe that by bending the rules of presidential immunity to him, America is giving Donald Trump more power than he should have which ultimately could lead to consequences on our nations culture and policy.
The Supreme Court ruling in July allowing almost absolute presidential immunity is indeed very frightening. Conversations surrounding its outcome were tense at the time, but have been excacerbated now knowing that Trump will be in office for the next four years. Under the ruling you wrote about, there is a strong window of opportunity for Trump to overpower and overturn minority voices and rights without facing any backlash -- something our Founding Fathers greatly feared (tyranny of the majority) and would have never intended in their initial vision of a weaker executive.
Furthermore, given Trump's immunity it becomes all the more hypocritcal as he threatens to put many of his political opponents in jail -- or at the very least punish them enough that many popular, wealthy, and media figures are now nervous to speak out against his presidency. Immunity enables a clearly unequal power dynamic between the incoming president and other figures in positions of power, making it all the more concerning what he and his administration will do during his term.
Trump’s history of pushing boundaries, coupled with the assertion of immunity for actions he deems part of his responsibilities, could set dangerous precedents. While immunity is intended to enable a president to perform their duties without constant litigation, its broad interpretation could grant Trump significant leeway to act without accountability for official actions. The complexities surrounding ongoing investigations into Trump’s alleged misconduct highlight the risks of such immunity protections. I find it alarming and troubling to consider the implications for the rule of law when a leader appears to prioritize personal power over democratic principles and legal responsibility. In the end, I hope there is some sort of consequence or accountability he must face.
In light of Biden pardoning his son, immunity and the scope of presidential powers when it comes to the absolving of crimes has been rediscussed.
In the case of Trump, just how this power will be used, is terrifying, given his bold statements to punish democrats/any opposition, and use his influence and powers "vested" by the Supreme Court to reward the behavior of his often law bending loyalists. Some of his current cabinet picks and close confidants, such as Matt Gaetz, are individuals who have been found liable- or suspected of crimes. If Trump and his circle are capable, and have historically proven to bend the laws, this would give them an easy way to do so. This begs the question just how FAR his administration can go now.
This is a really good read. The fact that they even tried to get Trump out of the way of criminal charges due to a presumption that "absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions performed within the outer perimeter of his official responsibilities" is scary for the future of this country. This sets a bad example for future presidents and gives the president more power, which puts us further on the path to oligarchy if we are not there already. I think the fact remains that a criminal should not be serving and this sets a bad precedent for the future as it removes the "checks and balances" from the president which allows him to make grand sweeping actions and get away from it scot-free.
The fact that Trump cannot be prosecuted from official duties represents an erosion of the constitutional principles that our country was founded on: that no man is above the law. It also invalidates the social contract, that fact that government and governed hold each other accountable. In the long term, virtually unlimited Presidential power risks an environment where accountability and justice are no longer universal rights, and where leaders only care about consolidating more power and gaining influence. I find it ironic that Trump, who gained popularity because of his populist appeal, has unlimited power above the law.
It's interesting to note that technically, the charges on Trump attempting to illegally overthrow the 2020 election can be refiled after Trump leaves office, as they were dismissed “without prejudice” – perhaps at some point, Trump will be held accountable.
Although there have been numerous republican officials speaking out against Trump's cabinet picks/support of unlawful individuals; there are still too many that have been silent for the sake of party loyalty, personal political reasons, or at worst, agreement and a blind eye taken to what has been going on. Though there is a possibility these picks will NOT make it through, it is up in the air; if there's one thing the nation has learned recently, it is that public opinion and polls can be heart wrenchingly unreliable. There is a reality that though Matt Gaetz himself withdrew, many other questionable picks won't; and as a nation we will just have to "live with that I guess". Note that there has only been one rejected nominee in the history of the senate.
I think this idea of Trump "bending the rules" is an interesting one to address. The idea of presidential immunity suggests that the president has immunity from certain lawsuits while in office. However with that being said, this is also not something that can protect a president from all legal harm. There has been debate about presidential immunity from criminal prosecution. It has been decided that they cannot be prosecuted or indicted while in office, however these immunity rules no longer apply after they leave office, which is why after Trump left, he became prosecuted for several legal cases that surfaced. Qualified immunity is something that protects people in government from liability within civil issues and lawsuits if their actions did not violate a clear, established law. There is no specific evidence saying whether or not the government is bending such roles for Donald Trump, not legally at least. However, these laws are relatively vague up for interpretation, so it makes me wonder if in the future, there will be other specifications or limitations to presidential immunity.
The Presidential immunity definitely adds a complex layer to Trump's ongoing convictions. However, as he's now been elected his court sentences have been postponed without another date set. Trump is able to wiggle out of his convictions for the time being and it's entirely possible that he's able to avoid any further action until after this 2nd term. Now whether or not he's able to dismiss the sentences altogether seems to fall under tyrannical powers, in my opinion. Being able to essentially "pardon" yourself under the technicality of the crimes being under a president's official responsibilities seems to go against the foundations of which this country was built on. The ability to assume such power shouldn't be within the presidential capacity because where does it end? Sure there's the restriction of crimes within the president's official capacity, but clearly Trump has been able to walk all over that line. It is because of this immunity that a convicted felon has been voted as the next President of the U.S.
Immunity for official acts is intended to ensure presidents can perform their duties without fear of constant litigation, but it also creates significant concerns about accountability. If Trump’s actions, like efforts to overturn the 2020 election, are deemed within the scope of his official duties, this ruling could shield him from consequences, even for actions that appear to abuse presidential power. This raises the question: where is the line between legitimate presidential responsibilities and overreach? The ruling could embolden Trump to act more aggressively in his second term, knowing the legal shield exists. At the same time, the uncertainty and ongoing legal battles surrounding this immunity may create gridlock and undermine public trust in the system. It’s going to be crucial for the courts and Congress to clarify these parameters to ensure no president is above the law, while still protecting the integrity of the office.
The line between official duties and outside actions is one that is fuzzy and inherently hard to define--which opens up the gate for abuse when the occasion permits. In Trump's case, his actions as the president will be most likely by checked by the Supreme Court if it warrants enough attention and gravity. I'm still surprised he was allowed to participate in the Presidential election, given his history of felonies. I also think that Trump will try to play around with the power of presidential immunity--maybe stretch it so that executive power can be further broadened and thus strengthened. I suppose this is the result of a role in which unitary power is expected to be exercised; there's always going to be breaches of power, but Trump will have to deal with the other segments of the government as he makes more political enemies.
Trump has a constant determination to abuse presidential power. A convicted felon, impeached during presidency, and still attempting to overrule the checks and balances of the US government. It it is both surprising and scary that he was able to win a second election after these events, however says alot about his loyal supporters. This can only put into perspective how future presidencies, or even more important, how this presidency will be in office. However, the main concern is how much the government seems to be protecting Donald Trump during his second term, and this Presidential Immunity Ruling only cements that.
Presidential immunity has always been a very complicated and controversial topic and it raises a lot of questions about the democracy of the US. The court cases of Clinton v. Jones and Nixon v. Fitzgerald has established what presidential immunity should be. But Trump has always abused the power he has and has always done things that are not right. His claims about presidential immunity push the limits of what immunity should protect, he wants to come out clean and in doing so he’s doing things that are bad for the country, they make the US look bad. It’s very clear that presidential immunity covers presidents from lawsuits against official duties, but it’s really concerning how broad presidential immunity is and it should definitely not shield criminal or dangerous activities. The ongoing investigation on Trump only creates a bigger debate on what presidential immunity should and shouldn’t protect.
Post a Comment