Biden, critics fear emboldened Trump after Supreme Court immunity ruling
![Biden, critics fear emboldened Trump after Supreme Court immunity ruling](https://thehill.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2024/07/Emboldened_070524_Illustration_NatalieWoodwardGregNashandAdobeStock.png?w=900)
A Supreme Court decision giving presidents wide protection from facing charges after leaving office has sparked fears voiced by President Biden and Democratic critics that former President Trump will be further emboldened should he be elected to a second term.
Trump and allies have eyed more ambitious plans for a second term, pledging to more forcefully use the levers of power at their disposal.
Trump has also suggested it would be fair game for him to seek revenge on adversaries if he’s reelected — raising questions about both the extent to which the decision would shield Biden, and whether it greenlights retribution sought by Trump.
It was an issue immediately put front and center by Biden in a Monday night address.
“The American people must decide if they want to entrust … the presidency to Donald Trump, now knowing he will be even more emboldened to do whatever he pleases whenever he wants to do it,” Biden said.
“For all practical purposes, today’s decision almost certainly means that there are virtually no limits on what a president can do.”
In their Monday decision, the high court determined that presidents have immunity for core official actions they take while in office. In all other official acts presidents are “at least presumptively” immune.
The court made clear that even Trump’s pressure campaign at the Department of Justice to investigate his unproven claims of election fraud and his efforts to push states to withhold certifying electors are “absolutely immune.”
It’s a decision Trump critics fear opens Pandora's box.
“Donald Trump has made it clear that, if he wins election, he will use his presidential powers to pardon all his co-conspirators and weaponize the Justice Department by firing career employees and replacing them with an army of sycophants willing to engage in retributive harassment against his political opponents,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), who served on the now-disbanded House committee that investigated Jan. 6, said in a statement after the decision.
“All of this would be presumably allowable under today’s horrific decision.”
Raskin described the decision as allowing a president to “assassinate political rivals, organize a military coup, or take bribes” — a description that parallels the dissent penned by the court’s three liberal justices.
In that dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor pointed to the same crimes, writing that allowing immunity for actions with roots in an official act would hamstring the courts from addressing any abuse of that power.
And in a concurring dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson likewise fixated on a president’s ability to carry out murders.
“While the President may have the authority to decide to remove the Attorney General, for example, the question here is whether the President has the option to remove the Attorney General by, say, poisoning him to death,” she wrote.
“Put another way, the issue here is not whether the President has exclusive removal power, but whether a generally applicable criminal law prohibiting murder can restrict how the President exercises that authority.”
Chief Justice John Roberts, in writing for the majority, said immunity was needed to prevent presidential prosecutions from “enterprising” prosecutors.
Roberts nodded to the potential for executives to go after one another without the sort of immunity conferred with his Monday order.
“The dissents overlook the more likely prospect of an executive branch that cannibalizes itself, with each successive president free to prosecute his predecessors,” he wrote in the majority opinion.
“An enterprising prosecutor in a new administration may assert that a previous President violated that broad statute. Without immunity, such types of prosecutions of ex-Presidents could quickly become routine.”
Trump has repeatedly suggested during his presidential campaign that revenge is on his mind, while his campaign has stated his retribution will be at the ballot box.
Last month, Trump told Newsmax it was “very possible” Democrats could face prosecution down the road. The next day, he told Sean Hannity on Fox News he would have “every right to go after them” after his own prosecution.
And Monday, after his one-time strategist Steve Bannon reported for prison for defying his Jan. 6 committee subpoena, Trump said Biden would “pay a big price,” a comment his campaign later said was about the election.
“Oh, this is pure weaponization,” he told a local Richmond, Va., radio station.
“What they've done in this country is unthinkable, and Biden is going to pay a big price for it, I believe.”
If a reelected Trump did want to go after a future former President Biden, Monday’s decision in some ways offers a shield.
Like Trump, as a former president, Biden would also be unable to face charges on conduct related to core official acts.
That could be a roadblock even as House impeachment leaders suggest they will send a criminal referral to the Justice Department reviewing what they have called influence peddling by the Biden family. It was a risky move from GOP investigators, as doing so would require them to name a crime Biden committed — something their probe has thus far failed to land on.
But that’s not the case for other Biden officials that have been a target of the GOP, including Attorney General Merrick Garland and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, along with members of Biden’s family. GOP members have also called for the prosecution of special counsel Jack Smith.
The decision also opens other avenues for Trump to investigate or harass Biden, actions that rely on his official authorities that would likely go unchecked by a court.
The decision includes other elements that complicate prosecution, barring the use of anything a president did under the scope of official authority as evidence elsewhere in a case and likewise instructing courts not to weigh a president’s motive in carrying out an act.
“A president raids the home of a political rival because of their beef, not because of any legitimately suspected criminal activity? The beef is irrelevant legally,” Lisa Rubin, an MSNBC legal analyst, wrote on the social platform X.
Political commentator Van Jones described the ruling as “a license to thug.”
“You can do whatever you want, and the Supreme Court is probably going to let you get away with it. That is very frightening in this case, and so I’m very, very concerned,” he said during an appearance on CNN.
Trump has celebrated the ruling on his social media site, writing at one point that Smith received a “high level SPANKING” from the court.
In another post he claimed he was completely exonerated despite the remand of his Jan. 6 case, which will weigh whether other actions he took to subvert the 2020 election fall into the bucket of core official acts.
“TOTAL EXONERATION! It is clear that the Supreme Court’s Brilliantly Written and Historic Decision ENDS all of Crooked Joe Biden’s Witch Hunts against me, including the WHITE HOUSE AND DOJ INSPIRED CIVIL HOAXES in New York,” Trump wrote Tuesday.
“All of these Unfair Charges represent the WORST level of Election Interference ever seen in our Country’s long and storied History.”
The Biden campaign says the decision is both alarming and a key issue for the race.
“I’m scared as s‑‑‑, and I think Americans are scared and should be scared of what Donald Trump will do, because he has been telling us for months,” Biden’s principal deputy campaign manager Quentin Fulks said following the decision.
“And so I can reassure you that when you do see President Biden out on the trail, he will be talking about the reasons why Americans should be scared of Donald Trump as he has been for months, and this Supreme Court opinion today just amplified that.”
Date: | |
Tag: | Joe Biden |
Filter
-
CBS News - Top stories
Jan. 6 victims frustrated over Supreme Court ruling on Trump immunity
Many of the victims and the families of those who were attacked in the Jan. 6, 2021, siege of the Capitol are sharing their frustration and anger with the Supreme Court.Donald Trump -
The Hill - Politics
Trump latches on to Supreme Court immunity ruling in documents case
Former President Trump is beginning to leverage the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity ruling in his classified documents criminal case. In court papers filed Friday, Trump asked U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon to halt most proceedings in ...Donald Trump -
NBC News - Top stories
Trump seeks pause in documents case, citing Supreme Court immunity ruling
The former president has argued that removing classified documents from the White House and allegedly designating them as personal items were "official acts."Donald Trump -
CBS News - Top stories
Trump asks judge to halt documents case after Supreme Court ruling
Former President Donald Trump and his legal team asked the federal judge overseeing the case involving his handling of sensitive documents to pause proceedings.Donald Trump -
The Hill - Politics
Rubio defends Supreme Court immunity ruling
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) defended the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity last week, saying that the justices “clarified what the law is.” Rubio, one of former President Trump’s top contenders to be his running mate, said that Trump ... -
NBC News - Politics
Trump seeks to use Supreme Court’s immunity ruling to quash classified docs case in Florida
Donald Trump is hoping that the Supreme Court decision in his election interference case can prove to deliver him a third procedural win, this time in the case in which he is accused of hoarding government secrets after he left office.Donald Trump -
The Guardian - World
The supreme court’s presidential immunity ruling mocks the rule of law | Corey Brettschneider
Citizens must make this presidential election about rescuing our democracy from authoritarianism. The US supreme court found this week that former presidents have presumptive immunity from prosecution for “official acts”. This ruling doesn’t just ... -
The New York Times - World
Why the Supreme Court Immunity Ruling Worries U.S. Allies
Legal experts say the U.S. Supreme Court ruling pushes past most of the norms in effect among American allies, adding more concern about the reliability of U.S. power. -
The Hill - Politics
Supreme Court immunity decision collides with Trump’s NY conviction
Just one month after a New York jury made him the first former president convicted of a crime, the guilty verdict in former President Trump’s hush money case is already in peril following a Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity. Trump’s ...Donald Trump
More from The Hill
-
The Hill - Politics
Senate Dems won't huddle Monday to discuss Biden
Senate Democrats will not be huddling Monday to discuss President Biden’s reelection efforts, according to a source familiar with Sen. Mark Warner’s (D-Va.) thinking. Axios had reported earlier that Warner was spearheading efforts to organize a ...Joe Biden -
The Hill - Politics
Biden 'dug in' as Dem calls to drop out rise
When President Biden sat down on Friday with ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos for the high-stakes interview on the heels of his disastrous debate performance, he was adamant about one thing in particular: He’s not going anywhere. “If the Lord ...Joe Biden -
The Hill - Politics
Biden campaign co-chair says Harris 'increasing her role' in reelection effort
Former Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-La.) said Vice President Harris is "increasing her role" in the campaign ahead of November's election. Richmond, co-chair of the Biden-Harris campaign, said Sunday on MSNBC's "The Sunday Show with Jonathan Capehart" ...Joe Biden -
The Hill - Politics
NATO chief says alliance will set up new command, establish financial pledges to support Ukraine
NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said Sunday the alliance is expected to agree to a five-point plan to support Ukraine in the war against Russia, including shifting international support to a unified command and establishing pledges from ...Ukraine -
The Hill - Politics
Record-setting heat will continue scorching western US this week
A dangerous heat wave will persist in the West and spread to additional cities this coming week, as forecasters predict record-breaking temperatures. The National Weather Service (NWS) said “dozens of daily record temperatures” were expected to be ...