Conservative justices of the US Supreme Court signaled support on Thursday for the argument that presidents may have some immunity from criminal charges for certain actions taken while in office, as they considered former President Donald Trump’s claim of immunity related to his efforts to challenge the outcome of the 2020 election.
During the hearing, justices posed hypothetical scenarios involving presidential misconduct such as selling nuclear secrets, orchestrating a coup, or accepting bribes.
However, some conservative justices, who hold a majority on the court, expressed concern that denying any level of immunity could have broader implications.
“We’re establishing a rule that will endure for generations,” remarked conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch during the proceedings.
Trump appealed to the Supreme Court after lower courts rejected his request for immunity from four election-related criminal charges, arguing that he took the actions in question while serving as president.
Justice Samuel Alito raised concerns about the vulnerability of a president, suggesting that the prospect of post-presidency criminal prosecution by a political adversary could destabilize the democratic process.
“If a sitting president who loses a closely contested election knows that a real possibility upon leaving office is not a peaceful retirement but rather criminal prosecution by a bitter political opponent—won’t that lead us into a cycle that undermines our country’s democratic functioning?” Alito asked Michael Dreeben, the attorney representing the special counsel.
Dreeben countered that there are legal avenues to contest election results, rejecting Alito’s concerns about potential post-presidency prosecutions.
Trump, who ran as the Republican candidate against Democratic President Joe Biden in the November 5 election, is the first former US president to face criminal prosecution.
