Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Supreme Court Divided on Trump Immunity Case, Shows Potential for Limited Protection

Reading Time: < 1 minute

The Supreme Court’s conservative majority is considering the immunity of former presidents from federal prosecution, particularly in the case of former President Donald Trump. The court expressed openness to some level of immunity for official acts but was skeptical of Trump’s argument for absolute immunity. The dispute revolves around criminal charges related to Trump’s alleged actions surrounding the 2020 election, with special counsel Jack Smith accusing him of attempting to subvert the transfer of power.

During the three-hour arguments, conservative justices indicated support for shielding former presidents from some criminal charges but were divided on where to draw the line between official and private conduct. The liberal justices raised concerns about unchecked presidential power and the potential for criminal activity in the Oval Office. The outcome of the case will determine whether Trump’s trial proceeds, with implications for future presidents.

The arguments highlighted the complex balance between presidential immunity and accountability, with justices grappling with the implications for democracy and the presidency. Trump’s legal team argued for broad immunity to protect the presidency, while the special counsel emphasized the need for accountability and the rule of law. The Supreme Court’s decision, expected by June, will have far-reaching consequences for Trump’s prosecution and the future of presidential power.

Taylor Swifts New Album Release Health issues from using ACs Boston Marathon 2024 15 Practical Ways To Save Money