Former President Donald Trump used his social media platform on Friday morning to advocate for presidential immunity. This comes as he confronts criminal charges and civil lawsuits in various parts of the country leading up to the presidential election.
In February, the U.S. Supreme Court decided to review Trump’s arguments that he is shielded from prosecution due to presidential immunity for his official actions during his tenure. The case is scheduled for oral arguments on April 25, and it is expected to attract significant attention as it carries potential implications for Trump and his anticipated rematch against President Joe Biden in the upcoming November White House election.
Federal prosecutors have made it clear that Trump does not have immunity. Special Counsel Jack Smith has presented his arguments to the U.S. Supreme Court, urging them to dismiss Trump’s assertions of broad presidential immunity.
Smith’s team of prosecutors argued that the assertion made by Trump, stating that he cannot be prosecuted for official acts carried out during his presidency, lacks support from both the U.S. Constitution and historical precedent.
According to federal prosecutors, while Trump may be entitled to some immunity for his official acts, they argue that certain actions he took were of a private nature and could be considered as interference in the election.
On Friday morning, President Trump addressed the issue on his social media platform, Truth Social, by sharing a series of messages.
“If a president is not granted immunity, the opposing party will immediately indict every president who leaves office,” he wrote emphatically. “Without complete immunity, a president of the United States would be unable to effectively carry out their duties.”
According to Trump, preserving presidential immunity is crucial for the smooth functioning of a democracy.
According to Trump, if a President lacks immunity, the opposing party can exploit and coerce them by threatening to indict them for actions taken during their term in office, even if those actions were completely legal and appropriate. Trump argues that this would spell the end of the presidency and drastically change the country. He suggests that past presidents, such as Obama, Bush, and soon, Joe Biden, would also be in significant trouble without the protection of presidential immunity.
He also contended that it is not in line with the intentions of the founders.
According to Trump, if Presidential Immunity is removed, the power and prestige of the Presidency will diminish, and in some cases, it may even lose all power. Trump emphasizes that this goes against the intentions of the Founders, as it would result in the Presidency being overshadowed by the other branches of government.
Prosecutors have a different perspective on the matter.
Prosecutors argued in a 66-page brief that the smooth operation of the Presidency does not necessitate granting a former President immunity from being held accountable for alleged violations of federal criminal law. They emphasized that no individual, including the President, is exempt from the law, as it is a fundamental principle of our constitutional system. According to the prosecutors, there is no constitutional basis, historical precedent, or policy rationale that justifies the absolute immunity sought by the petitioner.
In Washington, Trump is facing four federal charges filed by Smith’s team in connection to the contested 2020 election and the storming of the U.S. Capitol building on Jan. 6, 2021. The indictment accuses him of conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, conspiracy to defraud the United States, obstruction, and conspiracy against the right to vote and have one’s vote counted. Trump has pleaded not guilty to all charges.
In February, Trump’s defense received a significant setback as a federal appeals court determined that he does not possess presidential immunity to shield him from allegations of election interference in his Washington D.C. case.
“Former President Trump is now known as citizen Trump in the context of this criminal case, and he is entitled to the same defenses as any other criminal defendant,” stated the three-judge panel in a unanimous decision. They further emphasized that any executive immunity that may have shielded him during his presidency does not provide protection against this prosecution.”
President Joe Biden appointed two of the judges, J. Michelle Childs and Florence Pan, while George H.W. Bush appointed Karen LeCraft Henderson.
The Washington D.C. case is currently on hold as it awaits a ruling from the Supreme Court regarding Trump’s claims of immunity. Oral arguments for the case are set to take place on April 25th.
According to Trump, the criminal and civil cases he is facing are being portrayed as election interference and were strategically crafted by Democrats to prevent him from assuming the presidency.
