The U.S. Supreme Court was abuzz with heated arguments on Thursday as former President Donald Trump’s immunity claims took center stage, with an attorney for the president engaging in a fiery exchange with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.
In a dramatic moment captured in circulating audio, attorney D. John Sauer delivered a masterclass on presidential expectations around criminal culpability, invoking historical figures like Benjamin Franklin and President George Washington. Pushing back against Justice Jackson’s concerns about the potential for unchecked presidential wrongdoing, Sauer asserted that the concept of presidential immunity has been ingrained in American governance for over two centuries.
Jackson’s suggestion that immunity might embolden future presidents to commit crimes was met with a sharp rejoinder from Sauer, who underscored the longstanding tradition of immunity as a safeguard against undue political strife.
Meanwhile, President Trump, ensnared in his New York court battle over hush money allegations, eagerly awaits the Supreme Court’s ruling, which could have far-reaching implications for his legal troubles. Trump has staunchly maintained his innocence and argued for immunity both during and after his presidency.
The Justice Department, represented by official Jack Smith, has pressed for a swift resolution on the issue of presidential immunity, hinting at alternative paths should the court’s decision not align with their objectives.
Throughout the proceedings, references to historical presidential actions sparked complex debates about the applicability of modern laws to past events. Justice Samuel Alito probed attorney Michael Dreeben on the potential prosecution of President Franklin D. Roosevelt for the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II, while Justice Jackson questioned the rationale behind President Nixon’s pardon.
LISTEN:
Trump lawyer John Sauer just humiliated Ketanji Brown Jackson:
“The regime you've described is the one we've operated under for over 234 years.” pic.twitter.com/PB2bTnf0rG
— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) April 25, 2024
Trump’s defense team argued vehemently for immunity, asserting that subjecting the president to criminal prosecution for official acts would cripple the functioning of the presidency and expose future leaders to political manipulation.
As the courtroom drama unfolds, the nation watches with bated breath, awaiting the Supreme Court’s verdict on a pivotal legal battle that could shape the boundaries of presidential authority for generations to come.
"*" indicates required fields
