Trump verdict divides

Judge: President now “king above the law”

Donald Trump is pleased with the ruling of the US Supreme Court.

(Bild: AP ( via APA) Austria Presse Agentur/Steve Helber)

The conservative majority of the US Supreme Court has granted Donald Trump immunity from prosecution, at least in part. The ruling stated that presidents cannot be prosecuted for "official" actions. Liberal forces in the USA are fuming.

New York MP Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has described the Supreme Court's decision as an "attack on American democracy". Hakeem Jeffries, the minority leader of the Democrats in the House of Representatives, warned of a "dangerous precedent for the future of our nation".

Donald Trump, on the other hand, posted in large letters on his "Truth Social" platform shortly after the ruling: "BIG WIN FOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND DEMOCRACY. PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!"

Flaming dissent from female judges
The three liberal Supreme Court Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson disagreed with the conservative majority opinion (six to three votes).

"The relationship between the president and the people he serves has irrevocably shifted. In every exercise of his official power, the president is now a king who is above the law," Sotomayor said in a joint statement.

Background

• The ruling is about Trump's role in the storming of the US Capitol.
• The consequences are serious. Above all, there is the fundamental question: is a US president immune from prosecution by virtue of his office?
• According to the US Supreme Court, absolute immunity applies to "official" acts.
• The problem: the judges did not specify the exceptions in their ruling.

The case does not only concern Trump's efforts to reinterpret the 2020 election results. The judges warned of the "serious" long-term consequences of the decision and pointed out that their court had created a kind of "law-free zone" around the presidency.

This new immunity for official acts now "lies around like a loaded gun" for any "Commander-in-Chief" who wants to put his own interests, his own political survival or his own financial gain above the interests of the nation.

For the liberal judges, the reasoning in the judgment does not sufficiently clarify what is "official" and what is "private" - and therefore relevant for criminal prosecution. The Supreme Court has now returned the case to a district court in Washington. There, it will now be determined which of Trump's actions during the Capitol storm were of a "private" nature and therefore justiciable.

This means that a time-consuming process has been put back on track, making it unlikely that the trial will begin before the election. Should Trump win the election, he could then completely quash the charges, if any of them remain.

Judge fears horror scenarios
The US president is already the most powerful person in the USA, "possibly in the world". According to Sotomayor, true horror scenarios could occur. "Does he order Seal Team 6 of the Navy to assassinate a political rival? Immune!" A coup to stay in power? According to the Supreme Court judge, there is no threat of prosecution here either. A pardon in exchange for money? "Immune, immune, immune."

As long as these horror scenarios are presented in an "official" guise, they would also be legal according to the logic of the conservative judges. Or at least without criminal consequences.

Supreme Court judge Sonia Sotomayor

(Bild: AP ( via APA) Austria Presse Agentur/Mark Schiefelbein)

Sometimes judges conclude their dissent with a mild and polite addendum, writing: "With respect, I dissent." Judge Sotomayor instead concluded her letter with, "Out of fear for our democracy, I dissent."

The "keys to a dictatorship" were handed over to US President Joe Biden's campaign team on Monday.