US Supreme Court Holds Trump Has Immunity From Prosecution For “Official Acts”
Padmakshi Sharma
1 July 2024 4:31 PM GMT
In a landmark decision, the United States Supreme Court on Monday ruled that former President Donald J. Trump was entitled to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for acts within his exclusive constitutional authority during his presidency. The court further stated that he was entitled to “at least presumptive immunity” from prosecution for all his “official acts”. It clarified that there was no immunity for unofficial acts. The case has now been returned to the lower court, which will decide whether the actions Trump took were in an official capacity or not.
This 6-3 decision stems from Trump being charged with attempting to overturn the results of the November 2020 US elections by spreading false claims of election fraud. Trump had argued that, as a former President, he should be completely protected from being prosecuted for actions he took while in office. The lower courts (including the District Court and the D. C. Circuit) had rejected Trump's argument, saying that former Presidents do not have blanket protection from criminal charges. However, both the courts had not decided if Trump's actions were part of his official duties as President.
While noting that this case was the first criminal prosecution of a former President for actions taken during his Presidency in the US history, the court remarked that it was essential to carefully assess the scope of Presidential power under the US Constitution. The Supreme Court noted–
“The nature of that power requires that a former President have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure in office. At least with respect to the President's exercise of his core constitutional powers, this immunity must be absolute. As for his remaining official actions, he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity.”
The Court cited Article II of the Constitution, which vests executive power in the President, as the basis for this immunity. It further stated that under the constitutional structure of separated powers, such an immunity was bound to be provided.
This ruling could impact how future Presidents and former Presidents are held accountable for their actions while they were in office. It can be argued that this ruling may provide excessive protection to Presidents, potentially shielding them from legal consequences of criminal acts committed by them while in office.
Click Here To Read/Download Order
