In a historic immunity hearing, former President Donald Trump's legal team argued that he should have sweeping immunity from criminal prosecution for any actions taken during his presidency, including attempts to overturn the 2020 election and even ordering the assassination of political rivals. However, the judge expressed skepticism towards these arguments, indicating a potential challenge to Trump's claims of immunity.
Trump's lawyers contended that a president cannot be subject to criminal prosecution unless he is first impeached and convicted in Congress. They painted a dire picture of the potential consequences, stating that the absence of criminal immunity for a president would create a 'Pandora's box' where former presidents could be indicted for actions taken while in office. They referred to hypothetical scenarios such as a president selling pardons or ordering the assassination of a political rival, asserting that as long as the president was not impeached and convicted first, these actions would not be considered criminal.
