On July 1st the Supreme Court ruled that Presidents do have immunity from criminal prosecution of acts that were done in an official capacity as President. This case will specifically impact former President Donald Trump’s federal prosecution regarding his actions and inactions on January 6th - and his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.
“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 - and he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts.” The court concluded in a 6-3 decision.
The Supreme Court’s job is to litigate, not on what they feel is right or moral but rather based on what the constitution outlines as responsibilities of the federal government.
The Supreme Court is essentially the embodiment of the United States Constitution as they act through its will - and interpret the words written in the document, which is what they did in this case.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote; “Certain allegations—such as those involving Trump’s discussions with the Acting Attorney General—are readily categorized in light of the nature of the President’s official relationship to the office held by that individual,” in his official majority opinion.
Roberts also claimed that Trump was seeking a far broader immunity than what the constitution allows him to have, stating that all unofficial acts are subject to criminal prosecution.
NBC News claims that the court voted along “ideological lines” despite seeming to have accurately interpreted the constitution.
