The Supreme Court has concluded that the President of the United States is not above the law, at least sometimes.
Yesterday, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Trump v. United States, a case that was trying to determine whether prosecutors could prosecute Donald Trump for trying to overturn the results of the 2020 election, or whether he was immune to prosecution because he was president at the time. But the Supreme Court's actual decision wasn't just about Trump.
The court ruled that a president is presumed immune from prosecution for official conduct, including policy changes, military decisions and consultations with other administration officials, but does not include, for example, private conduct conducted solely as a political candidate.
On the specific legal questions surrounding Trump's election interference and the Jan. 6 storming of the Capitol, the Supreme Court was less clear. It left it up to federal judges to decide which of Trump's actions constituted official acts and which were private. “That analysis is ultimately best left to the lower courts,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote. (Read highlights from the Supreme Court's opinion.)
The practical effect of this ruling is to delay President Trump's election interference trial, making it less likely that a trial will take place before Election Day in November, if it even takes place at all.
In today's newsletter, we explain what this new precedent means for President Trump and how it could change presidential power for years to come.
Regarding Trump's accusations
Since prosecutors indicted Trump, he has pursued a strategy of delay, delay, delay. If he wins the election before the remaining criminal cases against him are concluded, Trump could use his presidency to block the trial from proceeding.
A Supreme Court decision would help Trump achieve his goal. First, Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is presiding over a federal election interference case, must hold a hearing to determine which parts of the case violate the Supreme Court's new immunity standard. Either side could then appeal Chutkan's decision. Any appeal could go back to the Supreme Court, causing several more months of delays.
The Supreme Court's decision all but ensures that Trump “cannot be tried for trying to overturn the results of the last election before voters decide whether to send him back to the White House in the next election,” wrote my colleague Alan Feuer, who has covered the case. But it does give prosecutors an opportunity to publicly present evidence against Trump that they will introduce as evidence at trial.
The ruling could also apply to state charges against Trump in Georgia and New York, who already filed a motion yesterday to overturn his New York conviction, citing the Supreme Court.
Presidential Powers
“We are writing a timeless rule,” Justice Neil Gorsuch said when the Supreme Court first heard the case in April. The court will decide what legal protections apply not only to Trump but to future presidents as well.
That's exactly what Roberts wrote in the majority opinion, which said that a president must be able to make difficult decisions without worrying that his choices might one day result in criminal penalties. “A president who is inclined to pursue one course of action based on the public interest may choose another course of action because he fears that criminal penalties may be imposed upon him when he leaves office,” Roberts wrote.
Some legal scholars believe the ruling expands presidential power too much. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in her dissent, argued that the ruling allows a president to do things that previously seemed clearly illegal. “Ordering Navy SEAL Team Six to assassinate a political opponent? Immunity,” she wrote. “Orchestrating a military coup to stay in power? Immunity. Accepting bribes in exchange for a pardon? Immunity. Immunity, immunity, immunity.”
The ruling doesn't insulate the president from all liability — he still must win an election, and Congress can still impeach him — and future rulings may further clarify the scope of presidential immunity. But for now, the Supreme Court has given the president broad legal protections that aren't available to anyone else in the country.
Learn more about the coat
-
Trump celebrated the verdict: “A huge victory for our Constitution and Democracy,” he wrote on his social media platform, Truth Social. “Proud to be an American!”
-
“Any president, including Donald Trump, will be free to ignore this law,” Biden said in a White House speech, calling the ruling a “dangerous precedent.”
-
Republicans celebrated the verdict, but Democrats expressed concern for the future of American democracy, with Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez vowing to introduce articles of impeachment against the judges.
-
Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito joined in the decision, rejecting requests from ethics experts to recuse the justices because of their wives' partisan activities.
-
In his concurring opinion, Thomas suggested that special counsel Jack Smith, who is investigating President Trump, was illegally appointed.
-
And in two cases involving regulation of social media companies, the court avoided final ruling and sent the cases back to lower courts.
-
The court also gave companies more time to challenge government regulations, a further blow to the power of federal agencies.
the latest news
2024 Election
The Rubik's Cube is celebrating its 50th anniversary. Mathematicians and enthusiasts have enjoyed exploring this puzzle's approximately 430 trillion possible combinations for half a century.
Ask Vanessa: How can you stay cool and stylish even in the heat?
education: The infants, toddlers and preschoolers born during the pandemic are now school age. Many of them are struggling.
The life lived: Critics often compare the Albanian novelist Ismail Kadare to Kafka and Orwell. His works are subversive attacks on Enver Hoxha's brutal dictatorship, evading censorship through allegory, satire and myth. But Kadare also wrote novels that portrayed the dictator in a positive light, and he later said he wrote them to garner support. He has died aged 88.
Sports
Copa America: The U.S. men's national team lost to Uruguay and was eliminated from the tournament, putting head coach Gregg Berhalter's job in jeopardy.
The culture war has spilled over into Britain's stately homes. The National Trust, the charity that looks after many of the stately homes, has changed displays in dozens of them to explain the places' connections to slavery and exploitation. Right-wing columnists and academics have been outraged, saying the Trust is woke and suggesting it is presenting an “anti-British” view of history. Read more about the battle.
More about culture
-
The global market for TV program orders is starting to recover after a significant slowdown, with Netflix and Amazon primarily driving the increase in new orders.
-
Young people on TikTok are dancing to a catchy song called “Friendly Father,” which The Wall Street Journal says is part of North Korean propaganda about Kim Jong Un.
-
Young Thug's long-delayed gang conspiracy trial has been indefinitely halted while a judge confronted with an uncooperative witness determines whether he should plead guilty himself.
