SUPREME COURT: "TRUMP has ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY" -- What Does that Mean?

Friends, I want to share with you the details about this Trump immunity ruling that just came out from the Supreme Court. The headline reads, "Justices Rule Trump Has Some Immunity From Prosecution."

In a historic decision, a divided Supreme Court on Monday ruled that former presidents can never be prosecuted for actions relating to the core powers of their office, as spelled out in the Constitution. However, this decision left open the possibility that the charges brought against Donald Trump by special counsel Jack Smith, alleging that Trump conspired to overturn the results of the 2020 election, can still go forward if based on his private conduct rather than his official acts.

This was the official holding of the court → “The nature of presidential power entitles a former president to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority; he is also entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts; there is no immunity for unofficial acts.”

For the first time ever, the Supreme Court has outlined a clear framework for understanding presidential immunity, building on various precedents. Here’s the essence of their new three-tier test:

Complete Immunity for Constitutional Acts: The Court ruled that the President is fully protected from criminal charges for actions that fall within his exclusive constitutional powers. This tier includes activities explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, such as issuing pardons, conducting foreign diplomacy, and commanding the military. This is a narrow and specific category, strictly limited to fundamental constitutional acts.

Presumptive Immunity for Official Actions: A President is presumed to be immune from prosecution for official acts unless the government can prove that prosecuting those acts wouldn't disrupt presidential functions. Essentially, if the President is acting in his official capacity, he is generally protected, but prosecutors can still challenge this if they can show it won’t interfere with the Executive Branch’s operations.

No Immunity for Unofficial Acts: "The separation of powers does not bar a prosecution predicated on the President's unofficial acts. The first step in deciding whether a former President is entitled to immunity from a particular prosecution is to distinguish his official from unofficial actions." This means that when a president acts outside his official duties, such as in personal or political capacities, he has no immunity.

This three-tier system ensures that presidents are neither above the law nor reduced to powerless figures.

In earlier videos, back when the FBI raided Trump's home, I took what I think was an interesting perspective, also saying that no one (not even a President) is above the law.

Before this ruling, no president had ever been prosecuted for a crime. This de facto total immunity meant that presidents were untouchable. The Supreme Court never had to address presidential immunity because there were no cases to rule on. However, with this new legal framework, presidents can now be prosecuted for illegal actions.

In summary, this decision is significant because it’s the first to define the scope of presidential immunity, ensuring that presidents are accountable for their actions without hindering their constitutional duties.

While it resolves only a few counts against Trump, it sets a precedent for holding presidents accountable in the future, balancing the need for presidential immunity with the principle that no one is above the law.

The bottom line is that this ruling from the Supreme Court is not the end of the line. The case is now returned to the lower courts for them to determine whether the conduct at the center of the charges against Trump was official or unofficial.

It ain't over till it's over. This is the ping pong game that happens with the Supreme Court, appeals courts, and lower courts. What do you think about this ruling? This information, again, comes from SCOTUSblog, the Supreme Court of the United States.