Former President Donald Trump filed a brief with the Supreme Court on Tuesday, presenting his argument for why he should be granted absolute presidential immunity from criminal prosecution. In the brief, he requested the justices to dismiss a four-count federal indictment related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, which he lost.
The oral arguments on the matter will be heard by the high court on April 25.
“The vital independence of the Presidency and the President’s ability to effectively carry out their duties would be compromised if the President could be subject to criminal prosecution for official acts after leaving office,” stated Trump’s attorneys in their opening brief to the Supreme Court in the case of U.S. v. Trump.
According to their argument, if criminal immunity is denied, it would leave future Presidents vulnerable to blackmail and extortion while in office. Not only that, but it would also subject them to years of post-office trauma inflicted by political opponents. The fear of prosecution and imprisonment in the future would become a powerful tool for influencing sensitive and controversial decisions made by the President, thereby undermining their strength, authority, and ability to make decisive choices.
Trump argued that presidential immunity is derived from the Constitution’s Executive Vesting Clause and the separation of powers, just like the unsuccessful arguments made in lower courts.
The claim was resoundingly rejected by a unanimous appeals court panel, but Trump continues to urge the justices to adopt the belief that only a president who has been convicted by the Senate after impeachment proceedings can be criminally prosecuted.
According to Trump’s team, the Constitution allows for the criminal prosecution of a former President. However, it also includes safeguards to prevent politically motivated prosecutions. These safeguards require a majority vote in the House and a supermajority vote in the Senate to authorize such a significant action. The Founders intended to strike a balance between holding the President accountable for any wrongdoing and protecting the Chief Executive from being targeted for political reasons, as they recognized the potential harm it could pose to our system of government.
The Supreme Court’s decision to hear the case brings a further delay to Trump’s prosecution. Special counsel Jack Smith has brought four charges against Trump, accusing him of election subversion in 2020 and on Jan. 6, 2021. Despite the charges, the former president has pleaded not guilty and maintains his innocence.
Smith’s team has received instructions to submit their own brief on the matter no later than April 8th.