Current:Home > NewsSupreme Court rules ex-presidents have broad immunity, dimming chance of a pre-election Trump trial -Infinite Edge Capital
Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have broad immunity, dimming chance of a pre-election Trump trial
View
Date:2025-04-12 16:02:08
Live updates: Follow AP’s coverage of the US Supreme Court.
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Monday ruled for the first time that former presidents have some immunity from prosecution, extending the delay in the Washington criminal case against Donald Trump on charges he plotted to overturn his 2020 presidential election loss and all but ending prospects the former president could be tried before the November election.
In a historic 6-3 ruling, the justices returned Trump’s case to the trial court to determine what is left of special counsel Jack Smith’s indictment of Trump. The outcome means additional delay before Trump could face trial.
The court’s decision in a second major Trump case this term, along with its ruling rejecting efforts to bar him from the ballot because of his actions following the 2020 election, underscores the direct and possibly uncomfortable role the justices are playing in the November election.
“Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of presidential power entitles a former president to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court. “And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts.”
Roberts was joined by the other five conservative justices. The three liberal justices dissented.
“Today’s decision to grant former presidents criminal immunity reshapes the institution of the presidency. It makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of government, that no man is above the law,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in a scathing dissent.
Sotomayor, who read a summary of her dissent aloud in the courtroom, said the protection afforded presidents by the court “is just as bad as it sounds, and it is baseless.”
Trump posted on his social media network shortly after the decision was released: “BIG WIN FOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND DEMOCRACY. PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!”
Smith’s office declined to comment on the ruling.
The justices knocked out one aspect of the indictment. The opinion found Trump is “absolutely immune” from prosecution for alleged conduct involving discussions with the Justice Department.
Trump is also “at least presumptively immune” from allegations that he tried to pressure Vice President Mike Pence to reject certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s electoral vote win on Jan. 6, 2021. Prosecutors can try to make the case that Trump’s pressure on Pence still can be part of the case against him, Roberts wrote.
The ruling was the last of the term and it came more than two months after the court heard arguments, far slower than in other epic high court cases involving the presidency, including the Watergate tapes case.
The Republican former president has denied doing anything wrong and has said this prosecution and three others are politically motivated to try to keep him from returning to the White House.
In May, Trump became the first former president to be convicted of a felony, in a New York court. He was found guilty of falsifying business records to cover up a hush money payment made during the 2016 presidential election to a porn actor who says she had sex with him, which he denies. He still faces three other indictments.
Smith is leading the two federal probes of the former president, both of which have led to criminal charges. The Washington case focuses on Trump’s alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election after he lost to Biden. The case in Florida revolves around the mishandling of classified documents. The other case, in Georgia, also turns on Trump’s actions after his defeat in 2020.
If Trump’s Washington trial does not take place before the 2024 election and he is not given another four years in the White House, he presumably would stand trial soon thereafter.
But if he wins, he could appoint an attorney general who would seek the dismissal of this case and the other federal prosecution he faces. He could also attempt to pardon himself if he reclaims the White House. He could not pardon himself for the conviction in state court in New York.
The Supreme Court that heard the case included three justices appointed by Trump — Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh — and two justices who opted not to step aside after questions were raised about their impartiality.
Justice Clarence Thomas’ wife, Ginni, attended the rally near the White House where Trump spoke on Jan. 6, 2021, though she did not go the Capitol when a mob of Trump supporters attacked it soon after. Following the 2020 election, she called it a “heist” and exchanged messages with then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, urging him to stand firm with Trump as he falsely claimed that there was widespread election fraud.
Justice Samuel Alito said there was no reason for him to step aside from the cases following reports by The New York Times that flags similar to those carried by the Jan. 6 rioters flew above his homes in Virginia and on the New Jersey shore. His wife, Martha-Ann Alito, was responsible for flying both the inverted American flag in January 2021 and the “Appeal to Heaven” banner in the summer of 2023, he said in letters to Democratic lawmakers responding to their recusal demands.
Trump’s trial had been scheduled to begin March 4, but that was before he sought court-sanctioned delays and a full review of the issue by the nation’s highest court.
Before the Supreme Court got involved, a trial judge and a three-judge appellate panel had ruled unanimously that Trump can be prosecuted for actions undertaken while in the White House and in the run-up to Jan. 6.
“For the purpose of this criminal case, former President Trump has become citizen Trump, with all of the defenses of any other criminal defendant,” the appeals court wrote in February. “But any executive immunity that may have protected him while he served as President no longer protects him against this prosecution.”
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who would preside over the trial in Washington, ruled against Trump’s immunity claim in December. In her ruling, Chutkan said the office of the president “does not confer a lifelong ‘get-out-of-jail-free’ pass.”
“Former Presidents enjoy no special conditions on their federal criminal liability,” Chutkan wrote. “Defendant may be subject to federal investigation, indictment, prosecution, conviction, and punishment for any criminal acts undertaken while in office.”
___
Follow the AP’s coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court at https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court.
veryGood! (646)
Related
- Meet first time Grammy nominee Charley Crockett
- To save money on groceries, try these tips before going to the store
- The OG of ESGs
- The inventor's dilemma
- Travis Hunter, the 2
- Taylor Swift's Star-Studded Fourth of July Party Proves She’s Having Anything But a Cruel Summer
- A Plan To Share the Pain of Water Scarcity Divides Farmers in This Rural Nevada Community
- ‘We’re Losing Our People’
- 'Survivor' 47 finale, part one recap: 2 players were sent home. Who's left in the game?
- Just Two Development Companies Drive One of California’s Most Controversial Climate Programs: Manure Digesters
Ranking
- Friday the 13th luck? 13 past Mega Millions jackpot wins in December. See top 10 lottery prizes
- How ending affirmative action changed California
- CEO Chris Licht ousted at CNN after a year of crisis
- In Florida, DeSantis May End the Battle Over Rooftop Solar With a Pen Stroke
- Off the Grid: Sally breaks down USA TODAY's daily crossword puzzle, Triathlon
- Colleen Ballinger's Team Sets the Record Straight on Blackface Allegations
- A landmark appeals court ruling clears way for Purdue Pharma-Sackler bankruptcy deal
- When the State Cut Their Water, These California Users Created a Collaborative Solution
Recommendation
IRS recovers $4.7 billion in back taxes and braces for cuts with Trump and GOP in power
How ending affirmative action changed California
A Petroleum PR Blitz in New Mexico
Yellen sets new deadline for Congress to raise the debt ceiling: June 5
Bill Belichick's salary at North Carolina: School releases football coach's contract details
Germany’s New Government Had Big Plans on Climate, Then Russia Invaded Ukraine. What Happens Now?
Two Towns in Washington Take Steps Toward Recognizing the Rights of Southern Resident Orcas
Inside Clean Energy: US Battery Storage Soared in 2021, Including These Three Monster Projects
Like
- US wholesale inflation accelerated in November in sign that some price pressures remain elevated
- Nearly 200 Countries Approve a Biodiversity Accord Enshrining Human Rights and the ‘Rights of Nature’
- Warming Trends: A Comedy With Solar Themes, a Greener Cryptocurrency and the Underestimated Climate Supermajority