Name: Supreme Court Seems Open to Allowing Some Presidential Immunity, May Delay Trump Trial
Uploaded: 2024-04-26T15:13:58.000Z
Description: The Supreme Court seemed skeptical on April 25 of former President Donald Trump's claim that he should receive absolute criminal immunity, but open to allowing some level of immunity for presidents.

Jack Bradley is a Washington correspondent for NTD News based in Washington, D.C. Jack previously anchored "NTD Newsroom" and worked as an assistant producer for the show. 

Jack Bradley

NTD Plus

News

News with integrity, from the U.S. and around the world. Focused reports and analyses that shed light on major issues the world deserves to know. NTD Evening News airs daily at 6 p.m. ET.

NTD Evening News

China’s Broken Promises Loom Over New Trade Deals

David Lam is a national correspondent based in California and a part-time anchor for "NTD Tonight." Before joining NTD he was a financial analyst.

David Lam

Californians React as Trump Calls for Gas Tax Suspension

Arleen Richards is NTD's legal correspondent based at the network's global headquarters in New York City, where she covers all major legal stories. Arleen holds a Doctor of Law (J.D.).


Arleen Richards

Federal Agencies Announce ‘Summer Surge’ of Law Enforcement into DC Ahead of 250th Anniversary

Christina Corona is a California-based reporter for NTD News. She primarily covers California news, politics, and entertainment.  

Christina Corona

Trump Administration Reports Zero Border Releases

Arian Pasdar is an international correspondent for NTD News based in South America. His reporting focuses on immigration and key events in Latin America.

Arian Pasdar

US to Host 1st Ever World Cup Final Halftime Show, Featuring Shakira, Madonna

Savannah Pointer is a politics reporter for The Epoch Times. She can be reached at savannah.pointer@epochtimes.us

Savannah Hulsey Pointer

Jason Perry is an Army veteran and NTD's National Security Correspondent based at the network's global headquarters in New York City. Jason primarily covers border security, national defense, foreign wars, and veterans' issues.

Jason Perry

Health News

Texas Children's Hospital to Open First-Ever Detransition Clinic Under Deal With DOJ

Sam Wang is a Washington correspondent for NTD News based in Washington, D.C. Sam covers politics on Capitol Hill, and U.S.-China relations. 

Sam Wang

Citizens Honor Police for Their Service and Sacrifice

Cary Dunst is the news anchor for NTD Evening News. He is also the co-host of NTD Good Morning.


Cary Dunst

Trump ‘Projecting American Influence and Leadership’ on Iran Issue in Beijing: China Expert

Chris Bob is a reporter for NTD and a host of "Profiles of Service." He is also a small business owner. Chris graduated from Union College with a concentration in politics and religion in Russia and the former Soviet Union.

Chris Bob

Senate Panel Advances Crypto Regulation Bill

Jason Blair is a national correspondent for NTD News based in California. 

Jason Blair

Lawmakers Weigh ‘Sanctuary’ Polices After Woman’s Death in Virginia

NTD Evening News Full Broadcast (May 15)

NTD Evening News Full Broadcast (May 14)

NTD Evening News Full Broadcast (May 13)

NTD Evening News Full Broadcast (May 12)

NTD Evening News Full Broadcast (May 11)

Don Ma is an anchor and senior business correspondent based at the network's global headquarters in New York City. Don is the anchor and producer of NTD's "Business Matters," which airs weekdays at 4:30 pm ET.

Don Ma

NTD Evening News Full Broadcast (May 10)

NTD Evening News Full Broadcast (May 9)

NTD Evening News Full Broadcast (May 8)

NTD Evening News Full Broadcast (May 7)

NTD Evening News Full Broadcast (May 6)

NTD Newsroom comprises teams of reporters, editors, and producers assigned to cover breaking news and other stories.


NTD Newsroom

Fast, compelling, first-hand news from China. China in Focus airs Monday–Friday at 8 p.m. ET.

China in Focus

China Sends Warships to Pacific Drill as Tensions With Japan Rise

Reuters is a news agency owned by Thomson Reuters. It employs around 2,500 journalists and 600 photojournalists in about 200 locations worldwide writing in 16 languages.

Reuters

We present news that is truthful and based on facts, outside of the political fog. Instead of focusing on the negative things happening around us, our mission is to give our viewers a good morning with empathetic and uplifting stories. Our aim is to provide an antidote to negativity by shining a light on the best side of people. We speak to inspiring people who positively impact communities, pursue topics that represent our common human values, and will never miss an opportunity to bring you heartwarming stories.

NTD Good Morning

2 US Embassy Personnel Assigned to Cartel Case Killed in Car Accident

The Associated Press is an American not-for-profit news agency headquartered in New York City. 

The Associated Press

US News

Gunman Kills 8 Children, Including 7 of His Own, in Louisiana Mass Shooting

Flora Hua is a reporter based at NTD's global headquarters in New York City, where she covers China news, U.S.-China relations, and human rights issues. Flora primarily contributes to NTD's "China in Focus."  

Flora Hua

Trump: Seized Iranian Ship May Have ‘A Gift From China’

Joseph Lord is a congressional reporter for The Epoch Times.


Joseph Lord

Aldgra Fredly is a freelance writer covering U.S. and Asia Pacific news for The Epoch Times.

Aldgra Fredly

Former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani Hospitalized in Critical Condition: Spokesman

Wildfires Across Georgia and Florida Have Destroyed Nearly 50 Homes and Are Forcing Evacuations

News you can trust from the U.S. and around the world. Critical information and insight. We cover the stories that others don’t. NTD News Today airs Monday–Friday at 11 a.m. ET.

NTD News Today

US Warns of China Hacks via Routers, Smart Devices

Juliet Song is an international correspondent exclusively covering China news for NTD. She primarily contributes to NTD's "China in Focus," covering U.S.-China relations, the Chinese regime's human rights abuses, and domestic unrest inside China.

Juliet Song

2 Americans Among Suspected Communist Rebels Killed in Clashes With Troops, Philippine Officials Say

Ryan Morgan is a reporter for The Epoch Times focusing on military and foreign affairs. He was previously a news writer for NTD. 


Ryan Morgan

Mari Otsu is NTD's White House correspondent based in Washington. 

Mari Otsu

World News

Middle East

Iran

3 US Warships Fend Off Iranian Attacks, Trump Says Ceasefire Still Holds

3 Dead in Suspected Hantavirus Outbreak on Cruise Ship in Atlantic Ocean: WHO

The Supreme Court seemed skeptical on April 25 of former President Donald Trump's claim that he should receive absolute criminal immunity, but open to allowing some level of immunity for presidents.

Conservative justices seemed poised to remand the case back to the district court in Washington with instructions on what constitutes official and private acts for further fact-finding proceedings. This would further delay President Trump's trial in Washington, and possibly other proceedings in Georgia, Florida, and New York, handing him a strategic win as he seeks to hold up cases until after the November election.

Attorney D. John Sauer argued for President Trump while former Deputy Solicitor General Michael Dreeben argued for Special Counsel Jack Smith. The case stemmed from President Trump's attempt to dismiss Mr. Smith's indictment related to his activities on and leading up to Jan. 6, 2021.

Justice Clarence Thomas kicked off questions by asking Mr. Sauer to pinpoint where in the Constitution he derives his concept of immunity. Mr. Sauer pointed to the Executive Vesting clause in Article II, which vests executive power in the president.

The justices spent much time wrestling with what constitutes an official act for which presidents should receive immunity. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, for example, wondered whether an act could be considered immunity if the president was acting in pursuit of private gain. It was her understanding, she added, that prior presidents understood they were vulnerable to potential prosecution.

Justice Jackson also asked why former President Gerald Ford would need to pardon former President Richard Nixon if he enjoyed immunity. Mr. Sauer responded that some of President Nixon's conduct occurred in his personal capacity.

In defending his broad scope of immunity, Mr. Sauer pointed to Mississippi v. Johnson and Marbury v. Madison—two cases that have come up in legal debate over this topic.

Presidential immunity isn't explicitly mentioned in the Constitution and therefore often provokes debate about what the founders of the nation intended. Justice Elena Kagan and Mr. Sauer sparred over the historical intent for presidential power with the former noting that the founders were opposing a monarch at the time and didn't include an immunity clause in the Constitution.
<h2>'Fundamentally Evil' Acts</h2>
Justice Sonia Sotomayor told Mr. Sauer that there are some things "so fundamentally evil" that they have to be addressed. She further asked whether the president could order the military to assassinate someone.

"It's hard to imagine," she told Mr. Dreeben, that a president could faithfully execute the laws while violating them.

A similar hypothetical came from Judge Florence Pan in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. She specifically asked about an assassination by SEAL Team Six—something Justice Alito suggested was not plausibly legal. He also cautioned against "slander[ing]" the military unit, saying that it had to disobey unlawful orders.

Mr. Sauer said it could be an official act and asserted that inquiry into a president's intent was inappropriate for determining immunity. He added that the indictment in question cut to the heart of conduct that should be covered by immunity.

Justice Kagan was also critical, suggesting that Mr. Sauer's argument went way "beyond" what the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel had advanced. At one point, she asked about whether the president was immune from prosecution for selling nuclear secrets to a foreign power or using the military to stage a coup. Mr. Sauer responded that allegations of criminal wrongdoing must first go through Congressional impeachment and conviction.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett seemed skeptical of this point, noting that other government officials—such as the nine justices—are similarly subject to impeachment.  She also wondered about the possibility that criminal conduct wouldn't be discovered until after the president left office, raising the prospect that impeachment and conviction wouldn't occur. According to Mr. Sauer, the founders assumed that risk and the nation couldn't right every wrong with its system of separation of powers.

Justice Jackson wondered why the president would be able to violate the law through his official acts while other officials had to follow the law. "Lots of people," she said, have to make life-and-death decisions.  She worried that "the most powerful person in the world" could act without the threat of prosecution. The incentives of absolute immunity, she suggested, could turn the presidency into "the seat of criminal activity" in the country.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, generally seen as a proponent of executive power, seemed to defend Mr. Sauer's position by suggesting that he wasn't trying to place the president above the law but rather was trying to distinguish between official and unofficial acts. He also worried that a charge in Mr. Smith's indictment—conspiracy to defraud the United States—could be applied in a broad fashion.
<h2>Crafting a New Standard</h2>
The oral arguments underscored the pressure facing the justices as they decide whether and how to craft a new standard for presidential immunity.

In a colloquy with Justice Kavanaugh, Mr. Sauer asserted that a statute used to charge a president must contain an explicit provision mentioning his office.

Justice Samuel Alito asked whether the "robust" form of immunity Mr. Sauer advocated was "necessary." He suggested a standard by which courts considered the plausibility of justifications for the president's actions—something Mr. Sauer also criticized for wading into presidents' intents.

Both Justices Alito and Sotomayor previewed a potential standard by leveling questions about whether reasonableness or plausibility should govern the evaluation of a president's actions. Justice Sotomayor told Mr. Sauer that plausibility is generally applied in cases of qualified immunity, which law enforcement typically enjoys.

Justice Barrett honed in on whether Mr. Sauer believed private acts were exempt from immunity. He said he did but suggested the court could remand the case for further consideration of how to view the specific acts. Justice Roberts wondered about creating a "one-legged stool" by expunging official acts from the indictment. "How does that go forward?" he asked Mr. Sauer.

In exchanges with Justices Barrett and Justice Elena Kagan, he specified which indicted acts he thought were official. For example, he defended communicating with state officials about the election as official.

Mr. Dreeben suggested that while presidents don't enjoy immunity for official acts, they could raise Article II defenses while facing prosecution. Justice Thomas asked him why prior criminal prosecutions hadn't taken place against presidents. Mr. Dreeben claimed in response that crimes weren't involved in previous acts.

Justice Alito worried that Mr. Dreeben's view of immunity was "diluted." He also seemed frustrated with Mr. Dreeben's position, telling him that he essentially believed presidents have a form of special protection—namely that statutes applicable to everyone must be interpreted differently when applied to them.  Mr. Dreeben agreed, arguing that courts followed a general principle of construing statutes to avoid serious constitutional questions.
<h2>Implications for Trump's Cases</h2>
President Trump has argued that he should receive absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for acts that fell within the outer perimeter of his official duties. The exception to this immunity, he argues, is if Congress impeaches and convicts him on charges.

The justices decided to tackle a narrower question: “Whether and if so to what extent does a former president enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office?”

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and D.C. District Judge Tanya Chutkan rejected that argument, instead claiming that presidents must face prosecution for alleged criminal wrongdoing.

Justice Roberts said he was concerned about the lower court's holding, which both he and Mr. Dreeben suggested was tautological. He also worried about "how easy" it would be for prosecutors to bring a case through a grand jury.

Mr. Dreeben also defended his position, saying that it wouldn't allow politically driven prosecutions given that the Constitution precludes that type of case. The "vast majority" of Justice Department prosecutors were ethical, Justice Alito indicated. However, he told Mr. Dreeben that not all were like that.

Experts have speculated to The Epoch Times that the Supreme Court will likely broaden the scope of presidential immunity to include criminal liability but to a more limited extent than what President Trump has requested. If the justices took this course, they could remand or send the case back to Judge Chutkan for further review and refinement of the case.

The case is expected to have potentially far-reaching implications for the presidency and the nation's separation of powers.

“It may be the most read opinion in the history of this country,” criminal defense attorney Keith Johnson told The Epoch Times. He added that “it will be the kind of thing that students will be talking about for decades to come.”

The last time the Supreme Court issued a major ruling on presidential immunity was in 1973 with Nixon v. Fitzgerald. In that case, the court ruled that presidents enjoyed absolute immunity from civil liability for actions that fell within the outer perimeter of their official duties.

The outcome of this appeal could delay lower court proceedings in President Trump's Washington trial as well as his cases in Georgia and Florida. It's unlikely that the Supreme Court, which is expected to release a decision in June, will write an opinion that delays his ongoing criminal "hush money" trial in New York.

Justice Gorsuch asked Mr. Sauer about presidents potentially pardoning themselves, something that has been raised as a prospect in President Trump's cases. Mr. Sauer told him that the law is unclear on that issue.

<em>From <a href="https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/supreme-court-seems-skeptical-of-trumps-immunity-argument-5637200">The Epoch Times</a></em>

Latest

Court

trump

immunity

Videos

Politics

01_Lead Story

04_Top Stories

argument

Latest Clips

Management

Supreme Court

Courts

Donald Trump

Trump Indictments

Sam Dorman is a Washington correspondent covering courts and politics for The Epoch Times. You can follow him on X at @EpochofDorman.

Sam Dorman

Latest and breaking news, documentaries, movies, and lifestyle content on NTD+.
 
Empower your knowledge and elevate your spirit with NTD+, your go-to destination for truthful news, insightful documentaries, and captivating lifestyle content that enriches your life.