Presidential Immunity: A Seismic Shift in U.S. Constitutional Law
In a landmark ruling on July 1, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Trump v. United States that a former President enjoys absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his exclusive constitutional powers, and presumptive immunity for other official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts.
This is the first ruling in U.S. history addressing a former President’s criminal liability for acts committed while in office.
Key points:
- If the act falls within the “conclusive and preclusive” core of presidential powers (e.g., pardons, removals, foreign policy), the President is absolutely immune.
- For other official acts, there is presumptive immunity, which the government must overcome by proving no interference with executive functions.
- Private or unofficial acts are not immune.
Immediate impact:
- Trump cannot be prosecuted for pressuring the DOJ to investigate alleged election fraud — the Court sees this as an official act, covered by absolute immunity.
- For other acts (pressuring the VP, dealings with state officials, public speeches), the Court remanded the case for lower courts to decide whether they were official or not.
The ruling states that the President is “not above the law”, but in practice, it places much of the presidency beyond the reach of criminal accountability, even after leaving office.
A truly seismic shift that could unbalance the U.S. constitutional system by elevating executive power above judicial scrutiny, all under the banner of separation of powers.