Biden slams Supreme Court decision on Trump immunity as a ‘dangerous precedent’ | CBC News

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Monday that Donald Trump can’t be prosecuted for actions that were within his constitutional powers as president, in a landmark decision that drew intensely critical reaction from President Joe Biden.

The justices, in a 6-3 ruling authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, threw out a lower court’s decision that had rejected Trump’s claim of immunity from federal criminal charges involving his efforts to undo his 2020 election loss to Biden. The six conservative justices were in the majority, while its three liberal members dissented.

The decision recognizes for the first time any form of presidential immunity from prosecution.

Trump is the Republican candidate challenging Biden, a Democrat, in the Nov. 5 U.S. election. The Supreme Court’s slow handling of the case and its decision to return key questions about the scope of Trump’s immunity to the trial judge to resolve make it improbable he will be tried before the election on these charges brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith.

“We conclude that under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of presidential power requires that a former president have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure in office,” Roberts wrote.

Immunity for former presidents is “absolute” with respect to their “core constitutional powers,” Roberts wrote, and a former president has “at least a presumptive immunity” for “acts within the outer perimeter of his official responsibility,” meaning prosecutors face a high legal bar to overcome that presumption.

In remarks at the White House, Biden slammed the ruling, calling it “a dangerous precedent” because the power of the presidency will no longer be constrained by the law.

“This nation was founded on the principle that there are no kings in America … no one is above the law, not even the president of the United States,” added Biden, speaking hours after one of his campaign officials said the ruling makes it easier for Trump “to pursue a path to dictatorship.”

The ruling could scuttle parts of the special counsel’s case as U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan mulls the breadth of Trump’s immunity.

WATCH | What does the ruling on immunity means for Trump?:

What the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on immunity means for Donald Trump

Analysts discuss what happens now that the U.S. Supreme Court has decided anything a president does in an official capacity is immune to prosecution.

In recognizing broad immunity for Trump, Roberts cited the need for a president to “execute the duties of his office fearlessly and fairly” without the threat of prosecution.]

“As for a president’s unofficial acts,” Roberts added, “there is no immunity.”

Trump hailed the ruling in a social media post, writing: “BIG WIN FOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND DEMOCRACY. PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!”

WATCH | U.S. Supreme Court makes sweeping ruling on presidential immunity: 

U.S. Supreme Court ruling on immunity criticized as ‘dangerous’

Donald Trump was quick to celebrate a U.S. Supreme Court ruling allowing presidential immunity for official acts while in office, a decision his opponents described as ‘unjustifiable’ and ‘dangerous.’

Trump, 78, is the first former U.S. president to be criminally prosecuted and the first ex-president convicted of a crime. Smith’s election subversion charges embody one of the four criminal cases Trump has faced.

The court analyzed four categories of conduct contained in the indictment. They are:

• His discussions with U.S. Justice Department officials following the election.
• His alleged pressure on then Vice-President Mike Pence to block congressional certification of Biden’s win.
• His alleged role in assembling fake pro-Trump electors to be used in the certification process.
• His conduct related to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by his supporters.

The outcome gave Trump much of what he sought, but stopped short of allowing absolute immunity for all official acts, as his lawyers had advocated. Instead the court specified that actions within the president’s “exclusive sphere of constitutional authority” enjoy such a shield, while those taken outside his exclusive powers are only “presumptively immune.”

WATCH | Key moments from the Biden-Trump debate: 

Key moments from the Biden-Trump debate

U.S. President Joe Biden and former president Donald Trump squared off in a debate in Atlanta that aired on CNN. Here are some of the major moments — including when Trump took advantage of a verbal fumble from Biden, as well as the current president accusing his predecessor of having ‘the morals of an alley cat’ regarding his ongoing criminal and civil legal issues.

The court found Trump was absolutely immune for conversations with Justice Department officials. Trump is also “presumptively immune” regarding his interactions with Pence, it decided, but returned that and the two other categories to lower courts to determine whether Trump has immunity.

The ruling marked the first time since the nation’s 18th-century founding that the Supreme Court has declared former presidents may be shielded from criminal charges in any instance. The court’s conservative majority includes three justices who were appointed by Trump during his time in office.

The court decided the case on the last day of its term.

Presidents now ‘above the law’: dissenting justice

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by fellow liberal Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, delivered a sharply worded dissent, saying the ruling effectively creates a “law-free zone around the president.”

“When he uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune,” Sotomayor wrote.

“In every use of official power, the president is now a king above the law,” Sotomayor added.

Trump’s trial had been scheduled to start on March 4 before the delays over the immunity issue. Now, no trial date is set. Trump made his immunity claim to the trial judge in October, meaning the issue has been litigated for about nine months.

Trump lawyers ask for delay in hush money sentencing

Trump’s lawyers on Monday asked the New York judge who presided over his hush money trial to set aside his conviction and delay his sentencing, scheduled for next week.

The letter to Judge Juan M. Merchan cited the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling earlier Monday and asked the judge to delay Trump’s sentencing while he weighs the high court’s decision and how it could influence the New York case, according to the letter obtained by The Associated Press.

The lawyers argue that the Supreme Court’s decision confirmed a position the defence raised earlier in the case that prosecutors should have been precluded from introducing some evidence they said constituted official presidential acts, according to the letter.