During a Supreme Court debate on Thursday, Special Counsel attorney Michael Dreeben argued against the notion of U.S. presidents having blanket immunity from criminal prosecution. The debate centered around former President Trump's immunity claim in a case related to election interference.
Dreeben raised concerns that if a president were to commit a crime towards the end of their term, Congress might not have sufficient time to take action. He emphasized that the blanket immunity being advocated for by Trump's attorney would essentially shield a president from criminal prosecution unless impeachment and conviction were pursued, which he noted are challenging political remedies to achieve, especially in cases where misconduct occurs close to the end of a term.
