Select Page

Supreme Court: Trump Has Absolute Immunity on Official Presidential Acts

Supreme Court: Trump Has Absolute Immunity on Official Presidential Acts

In a landmark decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that former President Donald Trump holds some degree of immunity in his federal election interference case. This 6-3 decision, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, has further delayed the trial and presents a significant legal victory for Trump. The ruling acknowledges that Trump is immune from prosecution for his “official” acts as president but does not extend this protection to unofficial actions. This decision has profound implications for Trump’s legal battles and the broader landscape of presidential immunity.

Impact on Trump’s Case

The ruling has a direct and significant impact on the prosecution’s case against Trump and the insidious “lawfare” strategy against him. The Supreme Court dismissed parts of the case related to Trump’s alleged efforts to use the Justice Department to further his claims of election fraud. According to the ruling, discussions with Justice Department officials fall under the president’s constitutional duties, rendering Trump immune from prosecution for these actions.

For the remaining allegations, the lower court must now decide which acts are official and therefore immune from prosecution. This process will delay the trial and potentially weaken the case against Trump if significant allegations are deemed official acts. Chief Justice Roberts made it clear that “the President enjoys no immunity for unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official.”

Former President Donald Trump celebrated the ruling on social media. He posted on Truth Social, “BIG WIN FOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND DEMOCRACY. PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!” This sentiment reflects the view that the ruling not only benefits Trump personally but also upholds a critical aspect of presidential authority.

The Supreme Court’s Decision Explained

Chief Justice Roberts’ opinion was clear and decisive, stating that a president cannot be prosecuted for actions taken as part of their official duties. This critical distinction means that any acts deemed official by the lower court are completely off-limits to prosecutors. In his decision, Roberts emphasized the necessity of this immunity to allow presidents to perform their duties without the fear of legal repercussions. He wrote, “Presidents cannot be indicted based on conduct for which they are immune from prosecution. On remand, the District Court must carefully analyze the indictment’s remaining allegations to determine whether they too involve conduct for which a President must be immune from prosecution.”

Roberts further elaborated, “The parties and the District Court must ensure that sufficient allegations support the indictment’s charges without such conduct. Testimony or private records of the President or his advisers probing such conduct may not be admitted as evidence at trial.” This ruling effectively shields Trump from prosecution for any actions that the lower court identifies as part of his official duties.

The Liberal Dissent

The court’s liberal justices strongly disagreed with the majority opinion, expressing their concerns in passionate dissents. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson argued that the ruling “breaks new and dangerous ground.” She voiced concerns that this decision could set a troubling precedent. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, wrote in her dissent, “The decision makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that no man is above the law. With fear for our democracy, I dissent.”

Broader Implications

The decision raises important questions about the extent of presidential immunity and its implications for future presidents. Trump’s lawyers argued that without such immunity, presidents might hesitate to take bold actions due to fear of prosecution by future administrations. They contended that this protection is necessary for presidents to execute their duties effectively and without undue fear of legal consequences.

On the other hand, the special counsel argued that internal safeguards within the Justice Department, along with independent checks by grand juries and federal courts, would prevent prosecutorial overreach. They maintained that fears of partisan prosecution are overblown and that robust mechanisms are in place to ensure fairness.

The ruling also highlights the complex relationship between the judiciary and the executive branch. With three Trump appointees on the Supreme Court, their votes have solidified historic conservative victories, raising concerns about potential biases in cases involving the former president. Moreover, two other justices have familial ties to Trump’s cause, adding another layer of complexity to the public perception of the court’s decisions.

A Significant Win for Trump

This Supreme Court ruling is undoubtedly a significant win for Donald Trump. By recognizing his immunity for official acts, the court has effectively shielded him from some of the most serious legal challenges he faces. This decision has temporarily halted the spectacle of a federal trial and could potentially lead to the dismissal of key charges against him.

Trump’s legal team had long argued that the most serious allegations he faces, including pressuring state officials and Vice President Mike Pence to participate in the scheme to retain power, should be classified as official actions beyond the reach of the law. This ruling provides a substantial basis for that argument, potentially leading to the dismissal of these charges.

For Trump, this ruling represents a major legal victory, reinforcing his claims of presidential immunity and delaying the legal proceedings against him.

While this will not completely counter “lawfare’ against Trump and future Presidents, it may substantially reduce it. And this throws a monkey wrench into the works of the Democrat strategy to destroy Trump through constant and continuous fake legal charges.

About The Author

18 Comments

  1. Darren

    This did not save Trump!
    This ruling saved Biden’s Illegal Alien Murdering Ass!

    Reply
    • frank stetson

      What is an “Illegal Alien Murdering Ass?”

      Reply
  2. Tom

    Oliver continues his efforts towards winning a Horist Award when he writes, “And this throws a monkey wrench into the works of the Democrat strategy to destroy Trump through constant and continuous fake legal charges.” As an independent, I have not seen any proof of such a strategy. And the charges are not fake, and the juries were real people, his peers whom decided that :

    1) E. Jean Carrol was sexually assaulted and proved it beyond a reasonable doubt.

    2) State of NY proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump cheated the tax system by devaluing the worth of his properties, and used shady business practices.

    3) E. Jean Carrol won again because of Trump’s mouth in that he continued to attack her and defame her to the point where she had to hire security services to shield her from Trump’s attackers.

    4) State of NY proved 34 felony counts of business fraud and proved such frauds were committed to conceal important information from the public that might have cost him the 2016 election.

    5) Special prosecutors have a mountain of evidence in the documents case that A) He did take and conceal classified documents; 2) He obstructed justice multiple times in the government’s attempts to secure the documents.

    Reply
    • frank stetson

      Tom,
      And don’t forget history:

      Dad caught cheating Gambling Commission buying millions in fake chips to bail Don out
      Trump University Punishment.
      Trump Foundation penalized and shuttered.
      Wife was raised a communist
      Trump has communist FIL living in his cabana
      Access Hollywood Tape
      A dozen young girls says he peeks in dressing rooms; Trump confirms to Howard Stern.

      Reply
      • Americafirst

        Show us the proof, little girl. Franki, come on! Where is the actual proof? I guess you don’t have it in you to provide proof of anything, just a big mouth to make us believe you. But actual proof is believable. Where’s the proof?

        Reply
        • Tom

          Here is proof just for fun. Maybe next time engage your brain before putting your mouth in gear dumbass!

          See *https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyhXSDeU_Oc* for more info.

          On his Trump University Scam, see *https://apnews.com/article/43033e7cb9974faf879b51251c3a0d07* Read about the $25M settlement against him and his scam.

          Melania was raised in Communist Slovenia, see *https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/a-crash-course-on-melania-trump/ * so update your knowledge if you have any on the subject.

          Reply
      • Archie

        Frank go take a shower with your daughter and shut the fuck up

        Reply
    • CMH

      Firstly, I am of no party at all. I was a LEGAL immigrant many years ago and because a citizen in 1994. I sat on the sidelines for all those years, unable to vote as a non citizen, unlike the illegals now voting. That in itself is a major travesty to this nation!! Secondly, he inflated the value of his properties to gain a loan, which was immediately paid off. They say he devalued his properties for property tax reasons, when it is the state, county and city who valuation properties fir property tax purposes. I am assuming you own a house? Have you had a valuation done on your house to see how much the resale value is, and compared that to your property tax valuation statement? Obviously not!! There is a huge difference!! The county tax valuation is a lot less than the resale value! All businessmen who own real property do this. It is common practice. Thirdly, have you by chance checked into the city of NY’s financial situation, since they allowed all those ILLEGALs in? They are pushing for a HUGE payout from their prosecution, to bolster the city’s funds to just run the city now!!

      As for E Jean Carol, there is actually no solid proof what so ever, just her testimony, and note that she didn’t come out if the woodwork, as did the rest of them, until many years after the supposed incident. Considering President Clinton’s antics, in the Oval Office no less, and the fact that he lies to Congress, the Senate AND the grand jury, saying he had to sexual relations of any kind with her, then had to finally admit he had lied, and never even received a slap on the wrist. Don’t you think it is mighty strange that it wasn’t until right after President Trump decided to run for President again, that ALL of this legal garbage started? Yes, most if the charges are false.

      Now to number 5. The documents which were lodged and secured in a safe area of his home. What about the hundreds of classified documents found at all President Biden’s homes in boxes in the garage, in car trucks and laying around inside his houses!! I see no prosecution pending on him at all! All presidents take documents they have declassified from their tenure as president, with them, which eventually are put in their presidential public library! Again, it wasn’t until AFTER he has announced he was running again, that that raid was issued by the Biden administration.

      As a retired legal assistant, in business fraud cases, there has to be a plaintiff who goes to the prosecutor to instigate a case before the courts. If a plaintiff does not bring the case, it cannot be prosecuted. This was strictly a way to stop Trump from running for president, and to fill the city coffers. That was made so blatantly obvious when they set his bail a such a disgraceful amount, that the judge intervened and dropped more than half!! You need to look at all the true facts and not just what you read and read online or on the TV.
      Once I started voting, AFTER I became a citizen, I had to show my ID to vote to prove my identity, and proof of citizenship, as back in those days you could not have a citizen SS card, only a legal alien card and SS card. I never vote for a party, only for each individual I feel, after a great deal of research, will be honest and do a good job!!

      Reply
      • Tom

        CMH, There were many victims of his real estate evaluation scam. 1) All those who did not get loans because DJT unfairly got more money than he deserved. 2) Taxes not paid on the property when he devalued it for assessment purposes. Your analogy to my home real estate tax assessment versus market value, quite frankly is ludicrous. There were two aspects which I have pointed out above. In business, you are not allowed to do what DJT did, its that simple. It was against NY law.

        With regard to E. Jean Carrol, Evidence included testimony from two friends Carroll spoke to after the incident, a photograph of Carroll with Trump in 1987, testimony from two women who had separately accused Trump of sexual assault, footage from the Trump Access Hollywood tape and his October 2022 deposition. It was a civil case, not a criminal case. So the bar is lower. Maybe you should read about our legal system and the burden of proof for criminal cases and civil cases.

        With regard to classified documents. I worked in anti-submarine warfare and submarine detection on a program called IUSS-SOSUS. As a previous holder of a very high clearance, I can tell you there are very specific rules dealing with treatment of these documents. He violated every rule. And a person’s home or resort bathroom or equipment closet does not meet the requirement. Such crimes are punishable by up to $250,000 fine and up to 20 years in prison depending on the number of documents, classifications, damage assessment done by the security organization, and intent of the abuser. IF I had done what Trump did, I would still be in jail and broke!

        With regard to your legal knowledge and our legal system, if you have the credentials you say, then you should know that the plaintiff was the people of the State of NY represented by the District Attorney. Trump frauded NY out of $M. The bail was actually a bond specified by NY law that the bond has to be the value of the judgement. You should know this.

        Reply
    • Archie

      What reasonable doubt? The old bitch didn’t bring up a single witness. Interesting comment from an idiot who always screams prove it. Just like little Frankie.

      Reply
      • frank stetson

        Archie, there were 11 witnesses.

        Proof: *https://www.politico.com/news/2023/05/05/trump-rape-trial-witness-tracker-00095179*

        Archie: BUSTED for not even looking to check his facts to look pretty stupid. Nicely played, Madam. NOT.

        Reply
  3. Frank stetson

    AF u just have to search back posts.

    Been sourced man times on pbp .

    Or just search by topic.on the web..

    Reply
    • Americafirst

      Oh, really, Franki? That is exactly, quote unquote what you did to me, and I told you to search online, yet you kept coming back EVERY time with, “show me the proof. Because you were too lazy to search and wanted your mommy to do it for you, so you badgered me to do the same thing you just said to me. So, little girl, show all of us YOUR proof! For real, this time! You love liar Joey so much, so show all of us the real proof of your words. Oh, I GOT the gist of your name for me as Fu. You sowed the seeds, now take like a good little girl.

      Reply
      • frank stetson

        Sorry, AF, u finally figured it out. Took awhile.

        Was finishing my dinner, thought you might be in a hurry.
        Did you ever show anyone any proof?
        Dad caught cheating Gambling Commission buying millions in fake chips to bail Don out *https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-04-10-fi-293-story.html*

        Trump University Punishment. *https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/federal-court-approves-25-million-trump-university-settlement-n845181*

        Trump Foundation penalized and shuttered. *https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2019/donald-j-trump-pays-court-ordered-2-million-illegally-using-trump-foundation#:~:text=Finally%2C%20the%20settlement%20required%20the,and%20dissolve%20under%20court%20supervision.*

        Wife was raised a communist HEY, AND YOU GET CHAIN MIGRATION FOR A PERK. I GUESS BAD FOR IMMIGRANTS BUT OK FOR TRUMP — HE’S GOT MOONATEE *https://www.chicagotribune.com/2018/08/09/melania-trumps-parents-are-not-acceptable-president-trump-said-so/*

        Trump has communist FIL living in his cabana (as soon as you back the sourcing you forgot to do.)
        Access Hollywood Tape (come on, you can’t be that stupid)
        A dozen young girls says he peeks in dressing rooms; Trump confirms to Howard Stern. (ditto_

        FYI: little girl? Mommy? Stop the name calling. Or RU just asking for it? EZ to be a nasty nerd keyboard killer. By why bother? Envy?

        Reply
  4. frank stetson

    AFu ought to be commended for adding to Trump’s top ten. Now guilty of chain migration over Melania’s family, the communist’s that Trump shows the oval too, all those documents just feet away from the cabana, and TRUMPY so gung ho against chain migration.

    Since Melanoma’s immigration story is pretty shady, perhaps pulling a Stormy Daniels to get into the country, it figures chain migration would be the next step. Luckily, she blew her brother off, so he’s not sleazing in.

    Thanks again for adding to the list.

    Reply
    • Americafirst

      I will stop the name calling when you stop telling me to STFU like you have several times. You feel you can say and do anything disgusting and horrible to others. Well, this is a two-way street. You got what YOU sowed and always will! You could have shown your postings in a nice way, but you chose to be nasty. You got what YOU sowed and always will. Do I need to repeat that, or can you even understand? I am standing up for all of us that post here. You do NOT own any of us, or is that hard for you to understand too? Oh, DO NOT EVER tell me what to do or say again! This goes for your girlfriend, too!

      Reply
      • frank stetson

        So, I stop telling you to STFU but you continue to troll me from the gutter. Revenge is that meal best served cold. Sweet.

        You continue to call myself and others, girls, as if being a girl is demeaning to you, Sweet.

        We provided all those sources to support the facts, you asked for it, but you now have nothing to say about those facts and everything to say about me and about Tom. Don’t take it personal, but you seem to want to get personal. And when you do, the only advice I can offer is that you, with all the respect that it engenders, should really, and I do mean this honestly: STFU.

        Reply
    • Americafirst

      Does this post you made mean YOU are an immigrant or are you just ignorant?

      Reply

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *