In the wake of a recent Supreme Court triumph for Donald Trump, Democrats are reportedly strategizing to curtail the former President's immunity.
This move is driven by concerns that if Trump secures the presidency in the upcoming November elections, he may wield his power without restraint. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has made it known that Senate Democrats are formulating a bill aimed at restricting presidential immunity.
According to Newsweek, some legal pundits have expressed skepticism about the Democrats' ability to override the Supreme Court's decision, arguing that any resultant legislation would be legally impotent. However, Stephen Gillers, a law professor at New York University, has a different perspective. He suggests that the president's authority is not solely derived from the constitution but also from statutes, opening a potential avenue for Democrats to limit Trump's power.
Gillers explained, "The Supreme Court said that when the president's power derives from the constitution, he has absolute immunity. Legislation cannot overrule that." He added, "However the president also derives power from statutes. Congress may be able to draft laws that negate what the court called the president's presumptive immunity when exercising non-constitutional powers that depend only on statutory authority."
Despite this, Gillers acknowledges that crafting such legislation would be a formidable task, given the likelihood of a court challenge from Trump. He stated, "Although the drafting will not be easy, under the court's own rationale, Congress has the power to do this." He further suggested that one approach could be to incorporate negative language into the legislation, specifying what the president cannot do using the powers granted by the legislation.
On July 1, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of broad immunity for presidents concerning official acts. The ruling also stipulated that official acts cannot be used as evidence in cases against a president for unofficial acts.
Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, was indicted on four counts of allegedly attempting to subvert the 2020 election results leading up to the January 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol. He has pleaded not guilty, dismissing the case as a politically motivated witch hunt. The case was put on hold while the Supreme Court deliberated on the issue of presidential immunity.
Schumer has indicated that Democrats are drafting a bill to classify Trump's alleged efforts to undermine the 2020 election as "unofficial acts," thereby excluding them from the recent Supreme Court case. On the Senate floor, Schumer voiced his disagreement with the Supreme Court's ruling, stating, "They incorrectly declared that former President Trump enjoys broad immunity from criminal prosecution for actions he took while in office. They incorrectly declared that all future presidents are entitled to a breathtaking level of immunity so long as their conduct is ostensibly carried out in their official capacity as president."
As the political landscape continues to evolve, it remains to be seen whether the Democrats' efforts will yield the desired results. The ongoing legal battles and political maneuverings underscore the complexity and dynamism of American politics.
Login