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 Justices Indicate Potential Immunity for Trump, Potentially Delaying Jan 6 Trial

Reading Time: < 1 minute

The Supreme Court justices are currently deliberating on a case that could have far-reaching implications for the future of the presidency in the United States. The case involves former President Donald Trump and his claim of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken while in office.

During oral arguments, the conservative majority of the court seemed inclined to offer some form of protection to Mr. Trump, while also acknowledging the need to differentiate between “official” acts and “private” acts. This distinction could potentially delay Mr. Trump’s federal election interference case from going to trial before the upcoming November election.

On the other hand, the liberal justices and conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett expressed skepticism about granting broad criminal protections to presidents. They questioned whether the court should issue a narrow ruling or address the broader question of presidential immunity from all criminal prosecution.

The case revolves around allegations that Mr. Trump attempted to overturn the 2020 presidential election results through false claims of election fraud and pressuring his then-vice president, Mike Pence. The prosecutor argued that some of the alleged acts constituted private actions, while Mr. Trump’s attorney agreed that some actions were indeed private.

The timeline for a decision from the Supreme Court remains uncertain, with the justices showing no urgency to expedite the process. However, the outcome of this case could have significant implications not only for Mr. Trump but also for future presidents and the integrity of the presidency itself. Stay tuned for updates on this pivotal legal battle.

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