Washington: In a landmark verdict, the US Supreme Court on Monday (local time) ruled that former President Donald Trump had some immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken while he was serving in the White House, diminishing the chances for a trial before the November election. The historic 6-3 ruling recognised any form of presidential immunity from prosecution for the first time that would further impact the upcoming election.
Chief Justice John Roberts threw out a lower court's decision that had rejected Trump's claim of immunity from federal criminal charges involving his efforts to undo his 2020 election loss to incumbent President Joe Biden. The six conservative justices were in the majority, while its three liberal members dissented. The slow verdict resulting in an additional delay makes it unlikely for Trump to be tried before the high-stakes elections.
For months, Trump had denied any wrongdoing and argued that he had immunity from prosecution, while alleging that the case of alleged interference in the 2020 presidential elections, along with three others, were politically motivated to keep him from a third term at the White House. The ruling was the last of the term and it came more than two months after the court heard arguments, further slowing the case.
What did the Supreme Court say?
"We conclude that under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of presidential power requires that a former president have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure in office," Roberts wrote in his verdict. The US Chief Justice said former presidents have "absolute" immunity with respect to their "core constitutional powers" and "at least a presumptive immunity" for actions within the "outer perimeter of his official responsibility".
In recognising broad immunity for Trump, Roberts cited the need for a president to "execute the duties of his office fearlessly and fairly" without the threat of prosecution. He further said that a President has "no immunity" for any unofficial acts. The outcome gave Trump much of what he sought but stopped short of allowing absolute immunity for all official acts, as his lawyers had advocated.
The verdict also overturned a verdict by a federal appeals court in February, which said that Trump was not immune to prosecution for his alleged plots to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential elections, which threatened to bring him close to an unprecedented criminal trial. The court said that any executive immunity that would have shielded Trump during his tenure as the US president "no longer protects him against this prosecution".
Trump hailed the ruling in a social media post, writing: "BIG WIN FOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND DEMOCRACY. PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!" The rulings means additional delay before Trump could face trial in the case brought by special counsel Jack Smith. Trump still faces three other criminal cases, two led by Smith. He was already convicted of hush money payments to an adult film star before the 2016 elections, The case in Florida revolves around the mishandling of classified documents. The other case, in Georgia, also turns on Trump's actions after his defeat in 2020.
If Trump's Washington trial does not take place before the 2024 election and he is not given another four years in the White House, he presumably would stand trial soon thereafter. However, if he wins, he could appoint an attorney general who would seek the dismissal of this case and the other federal prosecution he faces.
'A dangerous precedent': Biden on Supreme Court verdict
In remarks at the White House, Biden called the ruling "a dangerous precedent" because the power of the presidency will no longer be constrained by the law. "This nation was founded on the principle that there are no kings in America ... no one is above the law, not even the president of the United States," added Biden, speaking hours after one of his campaign officials said the ruling makes it easier for Trump "to pursue a path to dictatorship."
The court found Trump was absolutely immune for conversations with Justice Department officials. Trump is also "presumptively immune" regarding his interactions with his alleged pressure on Pence to block certification of Biden's victory in 2020, it decided, but returned that and the two other categories to lower courts to determine whether Trump has immunity.
The ruling marked the first time since the nation's 18th-century founding that the Supreme Court has declared that former presidents may be shielded from criminal charges in any instance. The court's conservative majority includes three justices Trump appointed. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by fellow liberal Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, delivered a sharply worded dissent, saying the ruling effectively creates a "law-free zone around the president."
"When he uses his official powers in any way, under the majority's reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. Orders the Navy's Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune," Sotomayor wrote.
Supreme Court's role in US presidential elections
The Supreme Court made two other rulings this year beneficial to Trump. In March, it reinstated Trump to the presidential primary ballot in Colorado. Last week, it raised the legal bar for prosecutors pursuing obstruction charges in Smith's election subversion case against Trump and defendants involved in the Capitol attack. This has become a major point of how big of a role the Supreme Court is playing in the US presidential elections, which has not been seen since the 2000 case between George W Bush and Al Gore.
Now the apex court has ordered lower courts to figure out precisely how to apply the decision to Trump's case. Hours after the verdict, Trump's lawyers on Monday asked the New York judge who presided over his hush money trial to set aside his conviction and delay his sentencing scheduled for later this month.
The letter to Judge Juan M Merchan cited the US Supreme Court's ruling earlier Monday and asked the judge to delay Trump's sentencing while he weighs the high court's decision and how it could influence the New York case, the people said. The former President was convicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records.
(with inputs from agencies)
ALSO READ | After Melania's whereabouts speculations, report claims she will not be '24/7 First Lady if Trump wins'
