July 25 (IPS) – CIVICUS discusses the US Supreme Court’s recent ruling on presidential immunity and its potential impact on the November 5 presidential election with Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, a law professor at Stetson University Law School.
On July 1, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that presidents have absolute immunity for the exercise of their core constitutional powers and are entitled to a presumption of immunity for other official acts, though they are not immune for unofficial acts. The decision comes as Donald Trump faces criminal charges for trying to overturn his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden.
The question now is whether Trump’s actions will be considered official or unofficial. But he is unlikely to be tried before the election, and if he returns as president he could pardon himself. Critics argue that the Supreme Court ruling violates the spirit of the U.S. Constitution by placing the president above the law.
What are the key points of the Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity?
This is a ruling in the federal lawsuit against Trump for trying to overthrow his loss to Biden in the Elections 2020. He is accused of pressuring state officials to overturn the results, spreading lies about voter fraud, and using the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot to delay Biden’s certification and stay in power. Trump has pleaded not guilty and asked the U.S. Supreme Court to dismiss the entire case, arguing that he was acting in his role as president and therefore immune from prosecution.
The Supreme Court did not do so, but instead created three new categories of presidential immunity: full immunity for official acts involving the core powers of the Constitution, potential immunity for acts falling within the “outer limit” of official duties, and no immunity for private, nonofficial acts.
The big question now is whether Trump’s actions will be considered official, giving him immunity, or unofficial, making him susceptible to prosecution. This is the first case of its kind, as Trump is the first U.S. president to be prosecuted.
How does this ruling affect Trump’s other criminal cases?
This immunity decision will likely delay all four of his cases. criminal casesbecause judges must apply these new rules and drop all charges related to the use of essential presidential powers, as they can no longer be used as evidence against him.
In addition to being accused of trying to overturn his 2020 defeat, Trump is also accused of paying hush money to porn actress Stormy Daniels during the 2016 election and failing to properly account for it in his corporate records. That case is unlikely to be affected by the ruling, as his actions do not involve the president’s core or peripheral powers. Judge Merchan will have to decide whether any of his 34 convictions for aggravated corporate fraud will stand or be vacated.
But some of his other crimes occurred during his time in the Oval Office. Trump is accused of conspiring to overturn his 2020 loss in Georgia by asking the state’s top election official to “find 11,780 votes.” Trump has pleaded not guilty and can be prosecuted in his personal capacity, since presidents have no role in administering U.S. elections. As in the Capitol case, this was a private action he took as a candidate and would be hard-pressed to fit into the category of presidential immunity.
The fourth case Trump will face is the case of the classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. Trump is accused of mishandling classified documents by taking them to his Mar-a-Lago residence after he left office and refusing to return them to the National Archives when he could no longer lawfully possess them. Since his alleged crimes occurred while he was no longer president, this case should not be affected by the immunity ruling. However, he could argue that he had the documents while he was president and ask that his case be treated differently than those of other defendants. This case was dismissed by Judge Cannon. However, the Mar-a-Lago criminal case could be revived if the 11th Circuit reverses her dismissal.
What are the broader implications of this case for the presidential election?
After this decision, the American public should think about the consequences of choosing their president, because the presidency can become a source of crime.
An honest president would not be affected by the Trump v. U.S. decision, because an honest person does not need criminal immunity. Only time will tell whether the Supreme Court has invited future presidents to go on a crime spree. But what is certain is that only American voters can keep criminals out of the White House. So, as I write in my new book, CorporatocracyThe stakes of the 2024 election for the fate of American democracy are enormous.
The public space in the US is being shaped by the CIVICUS monitor.
© Inter Press Service (2024) — All rights reservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service