{"id":2232423,"date":"2024-04-29T07:35:02","date_gmt":"2024-04-29T11:35:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/will-trumps-supreme-court-immunity-ruling-weaken-the-presidency\/"},"modified":"2024-04-29T07:41:25","modified_gmt":"2024-04-29T11:41:25","slug":"will-trumps-supreme-court-immunity-ruling-weaken-the-presidency","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/will-trumps-supreme-court-immunity-ruling-weaken-the-presidency\/","title":{"rendered":"Could the Supreme Court&#8217;s ruling on Trump&#8217;s immunity weaken the presidency?"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">22<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Fwill-trumps-supreme-court-immunity-ruling-weaken-the-presidency%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2232423&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><p>The Supreme Court appeared \u2062poised to rule \u200bon former presidents&#8217; immunity for official acts, sparking debates among legal experts. Former\u2063 President\u2062 Trump&#8217;s broad immunity claim faced skepticism. Justices suggested a test to differentiate \u2063\u201cprivate\u201d and \u2064\u201cpublic\u201d conduct, potentially \u2064impacting presidential power. Divisions arose among justices on the implications of limiting presidential immunity. Concerns were \u2062raised about\u2064 the consequences on future\u200d presidential actions.  <\/p>\n<p class=\"readmore\">\n    <button onclick=\"showReadMore()\" id=\"readmorebtn\">Read more&#8230;<\/button>\n<\/p>\n<hr id=\"line\">\n<span id=\"more\"><\/p>\n<div>\n<p>The <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/supreme-court\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Supreme Court<\/a> this week appeared poised to rule that former presidents enjoy narrow immunity for official acts they took while in office, prompting divided opinions from legal experts as to whether the ruling could diminish the power of the presidency.<\/p>\n<p>Former President <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/donald-trump\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Donald Trump<\/a> did not appear likely to win big on his claim that he enjoys broad presidential immunity against the four<a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/trump-maintains-his-innocence-says-bragg-has-no-case-against-him\/\" title=\"Trump Maintains His Innocence, Says Bragg Has \u2018No Case\u2019 Against Him\">-count indictment brought<\/a> by special counsel <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/jack-smith\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Jack Smith<\/a> over an alleged attempt to subvert the 2020 election. However, some justices on Thursday signaled they may establish a legal test to determine the difference between \u201cprivate\u201d and \u201cpublic\u201d conduct and send it back to the trial court for further consideration, which could delay the trial in that case past November as Trump again seeks the White House.<\/p>\n<figure><figcaption>This <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/supreme-court-likely-to-hold-new-york-law-violates-second-amendment\/\" title=\"Supreme Court Likely to Hold New York Law Violates Second Amendment\">artist sketch depicts<\/a>, from left, Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch, Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, and Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts at the Supreme Court during arguments over whether\u00a0Donald Trump is immune from prosecution in a case charging him with plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, April 25, 2024. (Dana Verkouteren via AP)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>The <em>Washington Examiner <\/em>spoke to several legal experts about how such a test could diminish the power of the executive branch if the Supreme Court were to develop a concrete approach to determine whether a former president was operating in an official capacity or a private manner. Given the unprecedented nature of the case, legal experts offered divided responses about the potential impacts a ruling may have on the executive branch.<\/p>\n<p>Michael O\u2019Neill, director of legal affairs at Landmark Legal Foundation, told the <em>Washington Examiner <\/em>the outcome of an immunity test absolutely \u201ccould diminish the power of the president.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cProsecuting a former president for actions undertaken while serving means future presidents will have to consider whether their actions will be subject to criminal indictment after they leave office,\u201d O\u2019Neill said.<\/p>\n<p>Gerard Filitti, senior counsel at The Lawfare Project, agreed with O\u2019Neill\u2019s assertion, adding that such a power subversion \u201cwould\u00a0serve as a Damoclean sword\u201d that threatens the ability of presidents to carry out their duties in office. Filitti added that the \u201cbest check\u201d on presidential abuse may well be \u201can informed electorate that considers character, judgment, and temperament in addition to the political stances of a candidate.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>But experts such as veteran criminal appellate litigator Alan Dershowitz, who represented Trump during his first impeachment trial in 2020, disagreed about the Supreme Court\u2019s eventual ruling limiting the powers of the presidency.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cNo, I don\u2019t think so,\u201d Dershowitz told the <em>Washington Examiner<\/em>, adding, \u201cI think if they drew a proper distinction between public and private acts it wouldn\u2019t weaken the executive branch.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Legal analyst and corporate general counsel Alton Harmon told the <em>Washington Examiner<\/em> he believes the court\u2019s would-be immunity would \u201cnot really take away any power of the president.\u201d <\/p>\n<p>\u201cIt\u2019s just making it clear that you are protected if you\u2019re operating within the confines of your authority,\u201d Harmon added.<\/p>\n<figure><figcaption>This artist sketch depicts Michael Dreeben, counselor to special counsel Jack Smith, right, as he argues before the Supreme Court during about whether\u00a0former President Donald Trump is immune from prosecution in a case charging him with plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, April 25, 2024. (Dana Verkouteren via AP))<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>Throughout the nearly three-hour Supreme Court hearing on Thursday, sharp divisions among the nine justices emerged as they grappled with an untested question: whether the doctrine of presidential immunity extends to criminal prosecution for acts undertaken by a former president while he was in office.<\/p>\n<p>The three Democratic-appointed justices, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, signaled that a ruling for full immunity could embolden sitting presidents to commit crimes while in the Oval Office, while the six Republican-appointed justices raised worries that <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/amnesty-international-strips-aleksei-navalny-of-prisoner-of-conscience-status-for-decades-old-comments-on-immigration\/\" title=\"Amnesty International Strips Aleksei Navalny Of \u2018Prisoner Of Conscience\u2019 Status For Decades-Old Comments On Immigration\">politically motivated charges<\/a> could be endlessly brought against future presidents.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIt\u2019s not going to stop,\u201d Justice Brett Kavanaugh, appointed by Trump, told Michael Dreeben, who argued on behalf of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/roger-stone-announces-he-will-sue-those-who-arrested-him-and-put-him-in-front-of-a-kangaroo-court\/\" title=\"Roger Stone Announces He Will Sue Those Who Arrested Him and Put Him In Front of a Kangaroo Court\">special counsel\u2019<\/a>s office. \u201cIt\u2019s going to cycle back and be used against the current president or the next president and the next president and the next president after that.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>O\u2019Neill stressed that a clear test could be helpful while acknowledging the potential pitfalls for setting up clear guardrails on a president\u2019s official conduct.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIf there is no clear test for what constitutes an \u2018official\u2019\u00a0act, then a president will never be sure whether his actions could be considered private and therefore subject to prosecution. If there is a judicial test, bad-faith individuals can use the factors to mitigate the likelihood that their actions would be outside the bounds of presidential immunity,\u201d O\u2019Neill said.<\/p>\n<p>Katie Charleston, an attorney and founder of Katie Charleston Law, said the dilemma before the court presents \u201ca bit of a catch-22.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI think there is a potential that it could weaken the power of that office, because we may have presidents \u2026 second guessing themselves as to what they may say or do in each scenario, and if you think about it, a sitting president, or even a former president, will make statements in his private capacity that will affect official acts,\u201d Charleston said.<\/p>\n<p>Chief Justice John Roberts at one point\u00a0criticized\u00a0the unanimous ruling against Trump from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that would have allowed the 2020 election case to move quickly to a trial. Roberts indicated the appeals court didn\u2019t lay out an adequate reason for why virtually all of Trump\u2019s actions were subject to prosecution.<\/p>\n<p>Other Republican-appointed justices, including Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Samuel Alito, appeared more open to a middle-ground approach that could uphold some level of immunity for former presidents. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee, appeared less sympathetic to the former president\u2019s case.<\/p>\n<p>Barrett at one point seemed to search for a way for Smith to keep the case moving to trial quickly, saying the special counsel could simply focus on Trump\u2019s actions that were private and not official.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe special counsel has expressed some concern for speed,\u201d Barrett said, asking Dreeben if the trial court can sort out the official or private acts of the presidency or whether there was \u201canother option for the special counsel just to proceed on the private conduct?\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Dreeben told Barrett that the indictment against Trump is significantly about private conduct, signaling that a trial could proceed even if the Supreme Court finds some immunity for Trump\u2019s official actions.<\/p>\n<p>Harmon said that Dreeben\u2019s assessment may not be so simple if the justices send the case back to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan for further fact finding on official acts after the justices put in place their new immunity test.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cAnother issue is that this case can be raised back up to the Supreme Court again,\u201d Harmon said, noting that Trump could contest Chutkan\u2019s findings on whether certain acts he\u2019s alleged of committing were public or private. He stressed his belief that \u201cthis is not going to get to a trial,\u201d speculating that at most, it will \u201cget to that evidentiary hearing about whether these facts in this case, as outlined in the indictment, are official or personal private ones.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The four charges Trump faces in Smith\u2019s Washington, D.C., indictment rely on three criminal statutes: a count of conspiring to defraud the government, another of conspiring to disenfranchise voters, and two counts related to corruptly obstructing a congressional proceeding.<\/p>\n<p>The Supreme Court is also preparing to deliver a decision in the case of a Jan. 6 defendant who is facing the same charges as Trump, Section 1512(c)(2), or corruptly obstructing an official proceeding, which could result in the justices finding that statute was misapplied to Trump and hundreds of Jan. 6 defendants. That result would mean half of Smith\u2019s four-count indictment against Trump would be wiped out.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/washingtonexaminer.com\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><strong>CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n<p>Trump, who is facing 88 charges across four criminal cases as he seeks another four years in the Oval Office, has pleaded not guilty in each case. He is currently spending four out of seven days each week in a \u201ccold\u201d Manhattan courtroom for a trial over the Democratic district attorney\u2019s 34-count indictment alleging he fudged business records to conceal a hush money payment to a porn star in the furtherance of an additional crime.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIf a President doesn\u2019t have IMMUNITY, he\/she will be nothing more than a \u2018Ceremonial\u2019 President, rarely having the courage to do what has to be done for our Country,\u201d Trump posted to Truth Social on Thursday, adding that would be the \u201cend of the Presidency, and our Country, as we know it.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>This week, the Supreme Court seemed ready to grant former presidents limited immunity for official actions during their term. Legal experts are split on whether this ruling might reduce presidential authority. Donald Trump&#8217;s chances of success on this claim seemed slim<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2633,"featured_media":2232424,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/wex-s3.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/AP24116012145931-1024x683.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2232423","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/wex-s3.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/AP24116012145931-1024x683.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2232423","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2633"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2232423"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2232423\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2232424"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2232423"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2232423"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2232423"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}