Former U.S. Attorney for Utah, Brett Tolman, has expressed concerns over the potential impact of a panel's ruling on post-presidential immunity. The panel, which oversees an immunity issue that could be taken to the broader court in the circuit court in D.C., has been a subject of controversy due to perceived partisanship. Judge Pond, in particular, has drawn criticism for her refusal to recuse herself and her posing of hypothetical questions that some consider ridiculous.
Tolman raises the question of whether a ruling that a president does not have post-presidential immunity could open the door for subsequent administrations to retrospectively charge former presidents for their decisions. He suggests that this could pave the way for the concoction of charges and the targeting of former presidents for political reasons. Tolman stresses that impeachment and conviction in Congress should be the proper avenues to hold a president accountable during their tenure.
The former U.S. Attorney draws parallels to the Constitution's allowance for individuals with prior felony convictions to run for president. This provision exists to guard against the abuse of prosecutorial power to eliminate potential candidates. Similarly, Tolman argues that the judiciary must avoid overstepping their boundaries and wield power in a manner not intended by the Constitution. He expresses hope that the Supreme Court will overturn any unfavorable ruling from the panel.
Tolman emphasizes the need to preserve the integrity of the separation of powers and safeguard the executive branch from undue influence. He points out that unelected judges, juries, and prosecutors could potentially hinder the functioning of the executive branch, the only part of government elected nationally. Moreover, he suggests that the fear of prosecution after leaving office could hamper a president's decision-making process.
The former U.S. Attorney raises concerns about the shifting balance of power from the elected to the unelected. Tolman highlights President Biden's use of executive orders to expand his authority, despite the knowledge of their illegality. He asserts that the case being pursued against former President Trump by Jack Smith is similar, with no sufficient grounds to bring charges related to the events of January 6th. Tolman concludes by commending Republicans who are standing up to what they perceive as tyranny and expressing love for their country.
The issue of post-presidential immunity and its potential implications on the powers of the executive branch is currently being closely watched by legal experts and individuals across the political spectrum. As the panel's ruling could have far-reaching consequences, the spotlight now turns to the circuit court in D.C. and ultimately, the Supreme Court for the final interpretation of the law.
