Supreme Court Grants Trump Absolute Immunity

The Supreme Court has recently granted former President Donald Trump absolute immunity for some conduct in seeking to overturn the 2020 election, a decision authored by Chief Justice John Roberts. This ruling has stirred significant debate over its constitutional basis. Critics, including Boston University School of Law professor Jed Shugerman, argue that the historical evidence overwhelmingly contradicts the majority opinion on presidential immunity.

The decision has drawn criticism from those who view it as conservative justices abandoning their judicial philosophy. Notably, Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, who emphasize history and tradition in constitutional questions, have faced scrutiny for their stance. The Supreme Court's recent embrace of originalism, especially in expanding gun rights, appears inconsistent with this ruling. Michael Luttig, a conservative former federal judge, remarked that originalism is only employed by the Court when convenient.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett critiqued the majority opinion, noting it impedes the admission of evidence in related criminal cases. She emphasized that the Constitution prohibits the president from accepting bribes, but the ruling complicates prosecuting such conduct. Chief Justice Roberts countered that public records could be used, though private records or testimony from the president and advisers are restricted.

Clark Neily from the Cato Institute suggested the ruling implies a president could not be prosecuted for taking a bribe for core presidential functions. Neily found the majority opinion challenging to accept, describing the issue of presidential immunity as a "really close call."

The ruling has already impacted Trump's legal battles. The judge overseeing Trump's New York criminal trial approved a delay in sentencing, now set for September 18 at the earliest, ensuring it occurs after the Republican National Convention. Trump's lawyers argue that the Supreme Court's decision necessitates a new trial, while prosecutors, who do not oppose the delay, deem the effort to overturn the verdict "without merit."

Judge Juan Merchan, who previously dismissed Trump's attempt to have the case dismissed on immunity grounds, will issue a related ruling on September 6. The outcome could hinge on whether evidence, like testimony from Hope Hicks, is considered off-limits. Trump faces potential sentences including prison time, probation, and fines, with Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg yet to indicate the specific sentence sought. This decision, alongside the Colorado ballot ruling, highlights the Court's interpretive methods to achieve particular outcomes, as observed by legal scholars such as Michael Smith from St. Mary’s University School of Law.

Conservative Bias:

Well, folks, here we go again with the liberal elites trying to undermine the very fabric of our democracy! The Supreme Court, in a moment of clarity and adherence to the Constitution, has granted former President Trump absolute immunity for some of his actions while in office. And what do the leftists do? They cry foul, as if they have any respect for the rule of law when it doesn't suit their narrative. These so-called legal experts, like that professor from Boston University, are up in arms because they can't stand the idea of a conservative president being protected from their endless witch hunts. Let's not forget, these are the same people who want to rewrite history and tear down our traditions. Justice Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch are being unfairly targeted simply for upholding the principles they were appointed to defend. The liberals are terrified because they know that without their ability to weaponize the judicial system against their political enemies, their entire strategy falls apart. And now, they want to drag this out to impact the next election cycle, hoping to keep Trump out of the race. It's a disgrace, pure and simple. The left will stop at nothing to destroy anyone who stands in their way, and this is just the latest example of their unhinged desperation.

Liberal Bias:

Once again, the conservative majority on the Supreme Court has shown its true colors, bending over backwards to protect their political idol, Donald Trump. This outrageous decision to grant him absolute immunity is nothing short of a constitutional travesty. Chief Justice John Roberts and his cronies have abandoned any pretense of judicial integrity, choosing instead to shield a man who attempted to overturn a democratic election. It's a slap in the face to every American who believes in accountability and the rule of law. Justices Thomas and Gorsuch, who love to preach about originalism and historical fidelity, have conveniently ignored those principles to serve their partisan agenda. This isn't about justice; it's about power. Justice Amy Coney Barrett's dissent highlights the absurdity of the majority's opinion, which essentially gives a green light for presidential corruption. And what does this mean for Trump's ongoing legal troubles? A convenient delay that pushes sentencing past the Republican National Convention, giving him more time to rally his base and muddy the waters. This is a dark day for our judiciary, proving once again that the conservative justices will twist the law into knots to protect their own. The American people deserve better than this shameless partisanship from the highest court in the land.