The U.S. Supreme Court today addressed for the first time the question of whether former U.S. presidents have absolute immunity from prosecution for acts while in office. Former President Donald Trump came up with this argument in an attempt to sweep off the table the indictment that accuses him of trying to illegally interfere in the last presidential election. The lower courts rejected his opinion, but the criminal proceedings in question have been stopped due to consideration of his objection.
The public session of the Supreme Court concluded after hearing arguments that lasted for two hours. The next one will take place on May 9, but the decision will probably not be made on it.
Trump’s lawyer John Sauer, similarly to the appeals court, faced questions from judges today about hypothetical scenarios in which the head of state accepts a bribe, sells state secrets or orders a coup or assassination, Reuters wrote.
Trump and his team present the theory that a former president cannot be prosecuted for acts falling within the exercise of office, unless he has previously been removed from office for the same acts on the basis of a constitutional lawsuit. At the same time, their official actions include an attempt to block the approval of the results of the 2020 presidential election, after which Trump refused to admit defeat. Because of those efforts, Trump was indicted by a grand jury last year at the suggestion of special counsel Jack Smith.
The Supreme Court has not yet addressed such a question; until last year, no ex-president had ever faced criminal charges. According to the media, most experts do not expect the Supreme Court to agree with Trump’s interpretation of presidential immunity. But it will also be important how quickly the judges decide and whether, for example, they return the matter to lower courts for further consideration.
Tags: Supreme Court Discusses Trumps Absolute Immunity Theory
