Presidential Immunity, The Supreme Court And Trump

 The case is before the Court on President Trump's effort to dismiss the indictment on presidential immunity grounds.

First, take a closer look at how the Supreme Court framed the question for the parties to address on the presidential immunity issue.

Turning to the merits of presidential immunity, other officers of other branches of government enjoy similar immunity for official acts.

Why would the Supreme Court of the United States recognize legislative immunity for members of the Legislative Branch and judicial immunity for members of the Judicial Branch, but deny it for the Chief Executive under Article I? Importantly, the Supreme Court's decision in Nixon v. Fitzgerald recognized absolute immunity for the president from liability for civil damages arising from any official act taken while in office.

In Nixon, the Court reasoned that the importance of the president's duties, his need to deal with matters likely to arouse "Intense feelings," and the potential for lawsuits to hinder the president's ability to effectively carry out the duties of his office compelled the need for immunity.

Another factor weighing in favor of presidential immunity is the fact that the president's official acts "Can never be examinable by the courts," as the Court recognized in Marbury v. Madison.

In light of all of these principles, the Supreme Court should recognize presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts. 

https://amgreatness.com/2024/04/05/presidential-immunity-the-supreme-court-and-trump/