Supreme Court demolishes foundation of U.S. law to aid Trump in criminal prosecutions
Digest
The Supreme Court issued a ruling today granting former presidents immunity from prosecution for any actions they can argue were official acts. This decision has been met with widespread criticism, with many legal experts and scholars expressing astonishment at its radical nature. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in her dissent, argued that the ruling effectively creates a "law-free zone" around the president, upsetting the status quo that has existed since the founding of the United States. She also highlighted the potential for abuse of power, citing examples such as a president ordering the assassination of a political rival or taking a bribe in exchange for a pardon. Congressman Adam Schiff, who served as the lead prosecutor in the first impeachment of Donald Trump, echoed these concerns, stating that the court has essentially unshackled the presidency to commit crimes. He also expressed concern that the ruling will delay any accountability for Trump, pushing it off until after the election, and potentially never coming if he is re-elected. Sheryl and Eiffel, a civil rights expert, emphasized the global implications of the ruling, arguing that it sends a dangerous signal to the world that the rule of law is not a universal principle. She also highlighted the fact that Trump has a history of abusing power and that the court's decision puts the country at risk. The ruling has also raised questions about the future of the federal indictment against Trump for his role in the January 6th insurrection. The Supreme Court has remanded portions of the case back to the district court, where Judge Tanya Chetkin will now have to determine whether Trump's actions were official and therefore immune from prosecution. However, the court has also placed significant limitations on what evidence the district court can consider, making it difficult to hold Trump accountable. The ruling has been met with widespread condemnation, with many expressing fear for the future of American democracy. The decision has also sparked a national conversation about the role of the Supreme Court and the need for reform.
Outlines
![](https://s3.castbox.fm/webstatic/images/book.5d108c35.png)
MSNBC Live Democracy 2024
This Chapter introduces the MSNBC Live Democracy 2024 event, a premier live audience event featuring various MSNBC hosts. It encourages viewers to visit msnbc.com/democracy24 to purchase tickets.
![](https://s3.castbox.fm/webstatic/images/book.5d108c35.png)
Trump's Sentencing and the Supreme Court Ruling
This Chapter discusses the upcoming sentencing of former President Donald Trump for 34 felony convictions in a New York state case. It highlights the factors that could influence the judge's decision, including the nonviolent nature of the crime, Trump's status as a first-time offender, and his lack of remorse. The chapter also delves into the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity, which grants former presidents immunity from prosecution for any actions they can argue were official acts. The ruling has been met with widespread criticism, with many legal experts and scholars expressing astonishment at its radical nature.
![](https://s3.castbox.fm/webstatic/images/book.5d108c35.png)
Slowburn Podcast Advertisement
This Chapter is an advertisement for the Slowburn podcast, specifically season 9, titled "Gays against Briggs." The advertisement highlights the podcast's focus on the Briggs Initiative, a California ballot proposition that aimed to ban gay and lesbian teachers from public schools.
![](https://s3.castbox.fm/webstatic/images/book.5d108c35.png)
Reactions to the Supreme Court Ruling
This Chapter explores the reactions to the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity. Congressman Adam Schiff, who served as the lead prosecutor in the first impeachment of Donald Trump, expresses concern about the implications of the ruling, stating that it essentially unshackles the presidency to commit crimes. He also highlights the potential for abuse of power and the delay in accountability for Trump. Sheryl and Eiffel, a civil rights expert, emphasizes the global implications of the ruling, arguing that it sends a dangerous signal to the world that the rule of law is not a universal principle.
![](https://s3.castbox.fm/webstatic/images/book.5d108c35.png)
Interview with Stormy Daniels
This Chapter announces an upcoming interview with Stormy Daniels, the subject of the criminal case against Donald Trump that resulted in his 34 felony convictions. The interview will be aired the following night on MSNBC and will focus on Daniels' experience testifying against Trump in the trial, the threats and harassment she has faced, and the implications of the case for the future of American democracy.
Keywords
Presidential Immunity
Presidential immunity is a legal doctrine that protects the president from being sued or prosecuted for actions taken while in office. The Supreme Court's recent ruling on presidential immunity has been met with widespread criticism, with many arguing that it creates a "law-free zone" around the president and undermines the rule of law.
Donald Trump
Donald Trump is a former president of the United States who is currently facing multiple legal challenges, including a criminal indictment for his role in the January 6th insurrection. The Supreme Court's recent ruling on presidential immunity has been seen as a major victory for Trump, as it could shield him from prosecution for many of his actions while in office.
Supreme Court
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the country. It has the power to interpret the Constitution and to overturn laws passed by Congress. The Supreme Court's recent ruling on presidential immunity has been seen as a major shift in the balance of power between the executive and judicial branches of government.
January 6th Insurrection
The January 6th insurrection was an attack on the United States Capitol by a mob of Trump supporters who were attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. The attack was a direct assault on American democracy and has led to multiple criminal investigations and prosecutions.
Rule of Law
The rule of law is a fundamental principle of democracy that states that everyone is subject to the same laws, regardless of their position or power. The Supreme Court's recent ruling on presidential immunity has been seen as a threat to the rule of law, as it could allow the president to act with impunity.
Democracy
Democracy is a system of government in which supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation, usually involving periodically held free elections. The Supreme Court's recent ruling on presidential immunity has been seen as a threat to American democracy, as it could allow the president to act with impunity and undermine the principle of equal justice under the law.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor
Justice Sonia Sotomayor is an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. She is known for her strong dissenting opinions, and her dissent in the recent case on presidential immunity has been widely praised for its clarity and forcefulness.
Congressman Adam Schiff
Congressman Adam Schiff is a member of the House Judiciary Committee and the Democratic nominee for the U.S. Senate race in California. He served as the lead prosecutor in the first impeachment of Donald Trump and was a member of the January 6th investigation in Congress. He has been a frequent target of threats from Trump.
Sheryl and Eiffel
Sheryl and Eiffel is a civil rights expert and the Vernon E. Jordan Jr. Distinguished Chair and Civil Rights at Howard Law School. She has been a vocal critic of the Supreme Court's recent ruling on presidential immunity, arguing that it has dangerous implications for the rule of law and the future of American democracy.
Q&A
What was the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity?
The Supreme Court ruled that former presidents are immune from prosecution for any actions they can argue were official acts.
What are the potential consequences of the Supreme Court's ruling?
Many legal experts and scholars have expressed concern that the ruling will create a "law-free zone" around the president, allowing them to act with impunity and undermining the rule of law. They also worry that the ruling could lead to abuse of power, such as a president ordering the assassination of a political rival or taking a bribe in exchange for a pardon.
How does the ruling affect the federal indictment against Donald Trump for his role in the January 6th insurrection?
The Supreme Court has remanded portions of the case back to the district court, where Judge Tanya Chetkin will now have to determine whether Trump's actions were official and therefore immune from prosecution. However, the court has also placed significant limitations on what evidence the district court can consider, making it difficult to hold Trump accountable.
What are the reactions to the Supreme Court's ruling?
The ruling has been met with widespread condemnation, with many expressing fear for the future of American democracy. Many legal experts and scholars have described the ruling as radical and astonishing, while civil rights experts have highlighted the global implications of the decision.
What are the next steps in the federal indictment against Donald Trump?
The case has been remanded back to the district court, where Judge Tanya Chetkin will hold evidentiary hearings to determine whether Trump's actions were official and therefore immune from prosecution. However, the court has placed significant limitations on what evidence the district court can consider, making it difficult to hold Trump accountable.
What are the implications of the ruling for the 2024 presidential election?
The ruling could have a significant impact on the 2024 election, as it could shield Donald Trump from prosecution for many of his actions while in office. This could give him a significant advantage in the race, as he would be able to campaign without fear of legal repercussions.
What are the arguments for and against the Supreme Court's ruling?
Those who support the ruling argue that it is necessary to protect the president from undue interference from the courts and to ensure that they can effectively carry out their duties. Those who oppose the ruling argue that it creates a dangerous precedent that could allow the president to act with impunity and undermine the rule of law.
What are the potential reforms that could be made to the Supreme Court?
Some potential reforms that could be made to the Supreme Court include term limits for justices, expanding the size of the court, and creating a code of ethics for justices. These reforms are aimed at addressing concerns about the court's legitimacy and its ability to act impartially.
What is the significance of the Supreme Court's ruling for the future of American democracy?
The Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity is a major turning point in the history of American democracy. It has raised serious questions about the rule of law, the balance of power between the branches of government, and the future of the country. The decision has also sparked a national conversation about the need for reform of the Supreme Court and the importance of protecting democratic institutions.
Show Notes
Plus, Trump immediately puts Supreme Court immunity ruling to use in trying to delay sentencing on his New York felonies