United States: Donald Trump will try to persuade the US Supreme Court this week to reverse a judicial decision to kick him off the ballot in Colorado over his actions concerning the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack, arguing that the constitutional provision his opponents cite does not apply to him as he was a former president, therefore.
However, there may be more instances of Trump asserting this kind of argument to the justices. As he fights four criminal cases and civil litigation in lower courts, Trump has repeatedly advanced a bold argument: To say that he is formally protected against or untouchable by these legal disputes.
“Trump appears obsessed with trying to place himself above the law. The theme running throughout these claims is that he cannot be held liable at law for anything he has done,” said constitutional law expert Michael Gerhardt, a University of North Carolina law professor. “No president or former president has made such outlandish, self-serving claims.”
Supreme Court’s Dilemma
On Thursday, the Supreme Court, whose 6-3 conservative majority includes three Trump nominees, is slated to hear Trump’s appeal of the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision to disqualify him from the state GOP primary ballot under the US Constitution’s 14th Amendment because of insurrection. He is the front runner on the Republican ticket for his party’s nomination to contest the Democratic President Joe Biden in the November 5 US election.
Trump never claimed sweeping presidential immunity as a defense in that case, the issue still might come before the Supreme Court in both criminal and civil cases, including issues dealing with Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election and defamation suits over rape accusations against him.
In the past, Trump has demonstrated no respect for the restrictions on his actions. He once stated during the successful 2016 presidential campaign that he “could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose any voters.”
In an attempt to evade federal criminal prosecution for his endeavor to reverse his 2020 loss to Biden, a Trump lawyer told appellate judges that a president could direct Navy commandos to kill a political foe and still remain insulated from prosecution unless impeached by the House of Representatives first and then convicted by the Senate.
Immunity Claim
When asked to comment on his claim of immunity, a social media post was referred to by the Trump campaign spokesperson from Jan 10, who claimed that a president could not carry out his duties without “COMPLETE IMMUNITY.” Nine days later, in a post, Trump declared that presidents should have immunity and opened a new case for “events that ‘cross the line.’”
The Supreme Court must answer unprecedented questions when it revises the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision that finds Trump disqualified from the presidency based on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment that states no “officer of the United States” who participated in the insurrection has the right to be elected or hold public office. However, Trump maintains that he is not covered under Section 3 as the president is not an ‘officer of the United States.’
Trump is also pursuing arguments about immunity in other cases that could rise to the Supreme Court, which has steadfastly held that presidential immunity is not absolute but still exists.
However, in cases concerning former presidents such as Richard Nixon in 1982 and Bill Clinton in 1997, it was found that the presidents enjoy absolute immunity from lawsuits for actions in their official capacity but are not protected from suits in their personal capacity. It has not yet been decided on the particular issue of whether the presidents are immune from criminal prosecution.
Appealing the district court’s denial of Trump’s immunity claim, Trump’s battle with federal criminal charges related to his attempts to reverse the 2020 election defeat is currently before the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals.
However, John Yoo from the University of California, Berkeley, a law professor who worked for President George W. Bush, said that the Supreme Court will likely dismiss Trump’s argument.
“His lawyers are pressing unprecedented arguments that are likely to fail in court, but they are not frivolous,” Yoo said.
Trump’s Multi-Front Battle

On the same lines, Trump has also invoked presidential immunity as a defense in a criminal case in Georgia involving interference in the election, lawsuits involving the Capitol riot, and in a writer E. Jean Carroll’s lawsuit of defamation after Trump denied in 2019 that he raped her in the 1990s.
However, in 2020, the Supreme Court dismissed Trump’s lawsuit calling for his protection from the subpoena that former Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. had issued while conducting an investigation assessing the hush payment the then-lawyer to Trump had paid to a porn star before the 2016 election.
Potential Repercussions
Legal experts warned of the repercussions if Trump wins the immunity case before the Supreme Court, but they also expressed concern about his chances of winning. According to Brianne Gorod, general counsel of the leftist legal organization Constitutional Accountability Center, it would “send the dangerous message that presidents can disregard the Constitution and federal law with impunity.”
While there were doubts expressed by some legal observers that Trump will win at the Supreme Court on the immunity issue, there were still concerns if he does. Brianne Gorod, the chief counsel at the liberal legal group Constitutional Accountability Center, stated that is a false message that would frame the view that presidents are allowed not to follow the constitution and federal law.
“A victory for Trump in the immunity lawsuit,” Gorod said, adding, “Would be deeply disturbing regardless of who prevails in the November election.”
Leave a Reply