Paige Gehring Dr. Mobydeen Constitutional Law 11-7-24 The Uncharted Future of Presidential Immunity In the case of Trump v. United States, 603 U.S. __ (2024), Trump was indicted on four conduct counts during the November 2020 election. Trump was accused of trying to overturn the election with false claims, but he dismissed his conduct on presidential immunity. According to Trump v. United States, 603 U.S. __ (2024), presidential immunity is “arguing that a President has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions performed within his official responsibilities.” The Supreme Court decided that Trump had presidential immunity with a 6-3 decision. This means that Trump and future presidents are immune from criminal prosecution for official …show more content…
United States allows for the President to be ‘king above the law’ (The Guardian, 2024). The President The case of Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997) helps explain this by showing that the president can be the king. In this case, a state employee accused former President Bill Clinton of sexual advances on her. The Supreme Court ruled that executive immunity doesn’t work in the case of civil law in federal court for actions before and after office. (Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997)). This sets forth the idea set forth by Justice Sotomayor clearly because it sets the tone that the President can do whatever he wants, even in the case of a crime. (The Guardian, 2024). This wholly deprives the accountability that the President should have and places the role above the law. Therefore, my holding would be that a president poisoning an attorney general would be covered by presidential immunity. Based on the case precedent set in Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982), Nixon was justified in firing someone with the protection of a civil suit. This case deals with a less severe case but still applies to the poisoning in being immune from