Was Donald Trump immune from prosecution as US President? The Supreme Court addressed this question for the first time. The decision will be far-reaching – and will influence whether and when the trial against Trump can begin.
The hearing before the Supreme Court made it clear how complicated the case is. But it also became clear: There will hardly be absolute immunity for former President Donald Trump. The skepticism of the nine judges on the US Supreme Court has become too clear.
Ketanji Brown Jackson asked Trump lawyer John Sauer whether presidents wouldn’t actually be encouraged to commit crimes if they couldn’t be prosecuted? And the judge warned that absolute immunity could make the Oval Office in the White House the “seat of criminal activity.”
Trump’s lawyer argued that if presidents had to fear impeachment as soon as they left office, they would not be able to carry out their duties properly. The looming threat of indictment will impact a president’s decision-making at precisely the time when bold and fearless action is needed most, Sauer said.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor then wanted to know: “What if the president decides that his rival is corrupt and he orders the military or someone else to assassinate him? Would that be in the course of his official duties and he would be immune from prosecution?” That’s a hypothetical question, but yes, under certain circumstances, replied Sauer.
Will the trial against Trump be further delayed?
But no matter how skeptical the judges were about absolute immunity, some also made it clear that they consider a certain level of immunity for ex-presidents to be useful in criminal proceedings. John Roberts, the chief justice of the Supreme Court, criticized the reasoning on which the lower court rejected Trump’s immunity request and asked: Why should the Supreme Court not send the case back to the court or issue an opinion that its reasoning did not comply with it? comply with the law?
If the Supreme Court actually decides this, it could mean that the final decision on Trump’s claim to immunity will take longer – and thus also the answer to the question of whether he can be tried for attempted election manipulation. CNN legal expert Paula Reid analyzed after the hearing that even if the Supreme Court did not grant Donald Trump absolute immunity, it still looked like a strategic victory for him.
Decision not expected for a few weeks
The longer it takes for a decision on the immunity question, the later the possible election manipulation trial against Trump could even begin. And the ex-president definitely wants to prevent a verdict before the presidential election in November. Because if Trump wins the election, he could simply stop the process afterwards. The Supreme Court is not expected to issue a ruling until late June or early July.
Trump himself was not present at the Supreme Court hearing in the US capital Washington DC. He couldn’t do that because he had to sit in a courtroom in New York instead. But he didn’t enter without pointing out again: It had nothing to do with him, but a president simply has to enjoy immunity. Trump means absolute immunity. He probably won’t get it.