Supreme Court divided over Trump’s absolute immunity claims

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks with Judge Amy Coney Barrett after she was sworn in as an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, U.S. October 26, 2020.
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks with Judge Amy Coney Barrett after she was sworn in as an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, U.S. October 26, 2020.
REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

Should a former president be held accountable for crimes committed while in office? That was the basic, yet incredibly weighty, question before the Supreme Court on Thursday when it began hearing oral arguments in a case related to former President Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.

Trump, who doesn’t want to face trial in the federal Jan. 6 case against him before his expected rematch with President Joe Biden on Election Day, has declared that presidents should have absolute immunity. He’s effectively argued that presidents should be above the law.

What happened? Some of the conservative justices (three of whom were appointed by Trump) expressed concern that allowing former presidents to be criminally prosecuted could present a burden to future commanders-in-chief. They seemed skeptical of Trump’s sweeping claims but appeared open to the idea that presidents should have immunity for some actions. There was a great deal of focus on whether a distinction should be established between official acts and private behavior.

Justice Neil Gorsuch, a Trump appointee, emphasized that the court was “writing a rule for the ages.” But Justice Amy Coney Barrett, another Trump appointee, agreed with the notion that the ex-president’s legal team was pushing a “radical” idea on presidential immunity.

Meanwhile, liberal justices worried that if the court ruled in Trump’s favor, it could open the door for future presidents to commit crimes. “If there’s no threat of criminal prosecution, what prevents the president from just doing whatever he wants?” asked Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.

TLDR: The court might rule that presidents should be granted some, but not absolute, immunity from criminal prosecution. This means the case could be kicked back down to the lower courts.

What’s next? Trump’s Jan. 6 trial was postponed to await the court’s ruling, which could come anytime between now and the end of June. Whether that trial occurs before voters go to the polls in November will depend on the timing and nature of the court’s final ruling.

More from GZERO Media

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speaks after signing an infrastructure agreement in Montreal, December 16, 2016.
REUTERS/Christinne Muschi

This is Justin Trudeau’s darkest hour.

--FILE--Chinese workers check tungsten ore at a factory
Oriental Image via Reuters Connect

Most Americans are likely unaware that the Department of Defense has morphed into a major mining investor but it is becoming a significant backer of Canada’s critical minerals sector.

Lisa Pauli, 47, who says she wants to apply for medical assistance in dying (MAiD) when she is eligible because of her severe anorexia, looks on, in Toronto, Ontario, Canada June 9, 2023.
REUTERS/Carlos Osorio

Canada’s medical assistance in dying (MAiD) regime is garnering criticism, as its rapid growth threatens to make the country the world capital of assisted suicide - if it’s not already.

Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speaks at the federal Liberal caucus holiday party, the day after Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland unexpectedly resigned, in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada December 17, 2024.
REUTERS/Carlos Osorio

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has been the face of Canada for so long that most foreigners can’t conceive how unpopular he is at home.

Former U.S. Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) speaks during a conversation with Democratic presidential nominee U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris moderated by Charlie Sykes in Brookfield, Wisconsin, U.S., October 21, 2024.
REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

On Tuesday, Republicans in the US House of Representatives issued a 128-page interim report on the riot at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021. In it, they suggest that “that there was not just one single cause for what happened” on that day but that former Republican Congresswoman Liz Cheney should be investigated for committing federal crimes.

A soldier from the Karen National Liberation Army (KNLA) on the outskirts of Myawaddy, the Thailand-Myanmar border town under the control of a coalition of rebel forces led by the Karen National Union, in Myanmar, April 15, 2024.
REUTERS/Athit Perawongmetha

For the first time in 30 years, the Karen National Union is back in the eastern town of Manerplaw.