The Supreme Court issued a ruling in Trump v. United States, clarifying that a former president has substantial immunity from prosecution for official acts while in office but not for unofficial acts. The decision was made on Monday, and the Court sent the case back to a lower court for further review.
The case arose from Special Counsel Jack Smith's federal election interference investigation, where former President Trump faced charges related to the Capitol riot on January 6, 2021, and alleged interference in the 2020 election. Trump pleaded not guilty to charges of conspiracy, obstruction, and conspiracy against rights.
During arguments before the Court, justices debated the implications of granting immunity to former presidents. Justice Samuel Alito raised concerns about the potential destabilization of democracy if a former president could face criminal prosecution by political opponents. On the other hand, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson questioned the risk of emboldening future presidents to commit crimes if immunity was granted.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh emphasized the significant impact of the Court's decision on the presidency, highlighting the need to consider future implications. Justice Neil Gorsuch underscored the importance of establishing a rule that would stand the test of time.
Former President Trump has consistently claimed that he is being targeted by political opponents, alleging that cases against him are orchestrated by President Biden and the White House. The ruling comes following a separate case in which a New York jury found Trump guilty of falsifying business records.
