BREAKING: SCOTUS Issues Presidential Immunity Ruling

by J Pelkey
0 comment

On Monday, the United States Supreme Court ruled that President Trump has absolute immunity.

Earlier this year, the US Supreme Court agreed to hear Trump’s presidential immunity claim in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s January 6 case in Washington, DC.

The Supreme Court has ruled that President Donald J. Trump has some immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken during his presidency. The Court determined that a former President has absolute immunity for actions within his core constitutional duties and presumptive immunity for other official acts, but no immunity for unofficial acts. The case has been sent back for further analysis to ascertain whether the specific actions in the indictment are official or unofficial.

Majority Opinion:

Newsletter Signup

Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the Court’s opinion, with full support from Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh, and partial support from Justice Amy Coney Barrett (excluding Part III-C).

Key Points of the Majority Opinion:

  • Former Presidents have absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within their core constitutional duties and presumptive immunity for other official acts.
  • Immunity does not cover unofficial acts.
  • Justice Amy Coney Barrett filed a partially concurring opinion.

Dissenting Opinions:

  • Justice Sonia Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
  • Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson also filed a separate dissenting opinion.

This will likely further delay a trial for the federal election charges against President Trump according to CNN.

CNN reported:

Supreme Court rules Trump has some immunity in January 6 case, jeopardizing trial before election

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that Donald Trump may claim immunity from criminal prosecution for some of the actions he took in the waning days of his presidency in a decision that will likely further delay a trial on federal election subversion charges pending against him.

In the most closely watched case before the Supreme Court this year, the ruling rejects a decision from a federal appeals court in February that found Trump enjoyed no immunity for alleged crimes he committed during his presidency to reverse the 2020 election results.

More From Fox News:

The Supreme Court ruled Monday in Trump v. United States that a former president has substantial immunity from prosecution for official acts committed while in office, but not for unofficial acts.

The Court sent the matter back down to a lower court, as the justices did not apply the ruling to whether or not former President Trump is immune from prosecution regarding actions related to efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

Justice Samuel Alito questioned the repercussions of charging a former president.

“Now if an incumbent who loses a very close, hotly contested election knows that a real possible nullity after leaving office is not that the president is going to be able to go off into a peaceful retirement, but that the president may be criminally prosecuted by a bitter political opponent,” Alito asked.

“Will that not lead us into a cycle that destabilizes the functioning of our country as a democracy? And we can look around the world and find countries where we have seen this process, where the loser gets thrown in jail,” he said.


Trump’s lawyers argued that he is immune from federal prosecution for alleged “crimes” committed during his tenure as US President.

“In 234 years of American history, no president ever faced criminal prosecution for his official acts. Until 19 days ago, no court had ever addressed whether immunity from such prosecution exists,” Trump’s lawyers stated in last month’s filing, according to CBS News. “To this day, no appellate court has addressed it. The question stands among the most complex, intricate, and momentous issues that this Court will be called on to decide.”

In February, President Trump asked the US Supreme Court to pause the immunity ruling in Jack Smith’s January 6 case in DC, following a decision by a federal appeals court, which is primarily composed of Biden appointees, rejecting his presidential immunity claims.

The DC Circuit Court of Appeals’ three-judge panel, consisting of Biden appointees Florence Pan and Michelle Childs, along with George W. Bush appointee Karen Henderson, denied Trump’s immunity claims.

“We have balanced former President Trump’s asserted interests in executive immunity against the vital public interests that favor allowing this prosecution to proceed,” the three-judge panel wrote.

“We conclude that ‘concerns of public policy, especially as illuminated by our history and the structure of our government’ compel the rejection of his claim of immunity in this case,” they wrote.

President Trump celebrated the ruling on Truth Social:


You may also like

Leave a Comment

Breaking Digest is focused on reporting breaking news that matters to the American people.

Edtior's Picks

Latest Articles