Trump’s Supreme Court immunity case revolves around the Nixon rulings

The Supreme Court is set to debate whether former President Donald Trump has immunity from criminal prosecution, with both Mr. Trump and special counsel Jack Smith citing court cases involving former President Richard Nixon to support their arguments.

Mr. Trump is pointing to the 1982 Supreme Court case Nixon v Fitzgerald to argue for immunity from prosecution on federal election interference charges. On the other hand, Mr. Smith is using the 1974 Supreme Court case United States v Nixon to argue against immunity for Mr. Trump.

The cases involving Nixon offer insight into the current debate surrounding Mr. Trump’s immunity case. In Nixon v Fitzgerald, the Supreme Court ruled that presidents cannot be sued for actions taken while in office. This ruling stemmed from a case where a former contractor sued Nixon and White House aides for damages after losing his job.

In United States v Nixon, the Supreme Court ruled that a president must comply with a criminal subpoena and that presidential privilege cannot excuse someone from the judicial process. This ruling ultimately led to Nixon’s resignation in the wake of the Watergate scandal.

Mr. Smith argues that granting immunity to Mr. Trump would go against the principle of applying criminal laws equally to all individuals, including the President. He points to Nixon’s ultimate pardon by President Gerald Ford as an example of the ruling’s application to Mr. Trump’s situation.

The debate over presidential immunity from criminal prosecution is a crucial issue that will be deliberated by the Supreme Court, drawing parallels to past cases involving Nixon and shedding light on the legal implications for Mr. Trump.