It was the most dramatic clash yet in Donald Trump’s intense court schedule in the 2024 election year. Trump himself was physically present in a New York courtroom, charged with accounting violations. In the capital Washington, at the same time, the Supreme Court bombarded Trump’s lawyers, and the Justice Department’s lawyers with questions about immunity.
That’s how the judges reason
The Supreme Court justices appeared to accept neither Donald Trump’s claims that he should be covered by absolute immunity for things he did during his time as president nor Special Counsel Jack Smith’s claims that immunity does not apply to former presidents at all.
“If criminal liability is out of the question, wouldn’t there be a significant risk that future presidents would be encouraged to commit crimes with impunity while in office?” asked liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Good news for Trump
Donald Trump believes he enjoys “absolute immunity” for things he did during his time as president, and he has warned of “the end of our country as we know it” if the court follows the Justice Department’s line.
If a president doesn’t have immunity, then the opposition party can blackmail the president by saying ‘if you don’t give us everything we want, we will prosecute you for things you did in office’”.
In the indictment where Trump is accused of having tried to invalidate and change the election results, there are both actions that Trump is deemed to have done in his capacity as president and actions he has done in his capacity as a private person and presidential candidate. If the court chooses to give presidents immunity for some types of actions but not others, then special counsel Jack Smith’s indictment will have to be reworked, which will take time.
Then there is much evidence that a possible trial will only be able to start after the election this autumn. It was happy news for Donald Trump.