During nearly three hours of historic Supreme Court arguments, Chief Justice John Roberts remained largely silent. However, his messages were clear – a lower court decision denying Donald Trump absolute immunity will be overturned, and prosecutors’ good faith cannot be relied upon in this case. The facts surrounding the election subversion allegations against Trump are not directly relevant to him as Chief Justice for the specific hearing before him currently, according to Roberts during oral arguments relating to ex-President Donald Trump’s claim of immunity from criminal charges while he was still President.
Despite signaling that a majority would reject former president Trump’s broad proposition and find some form of legal accountability due to any past wrongdoings by him as President, whatever consequences for these matters, in this hearing the Supreme Court conservatives focussed on concerns over potential retaliation against an ex-President at the hands of a new administration or prosecutors.
The Chief Justice and his conservative colleagues avoided discussing specific allegations surrounding Trump’s rejection of election results, efforts to organize alternate slates of electors and January 6th attack in Congress, which had been discussed by lower court judges who previously heard Trump’s claim for immunity from criminal charges while still President.
Roberts was critical of the DC Circuit US Court of Appeals opinion that he found lacking sufficient legal grounding on this matter, stating it seemed to suggest former presidents could be prosecuted simply because they were being charged with a crime – “As I read it,” Roberts said, “it says simply a former president can be prosecuted because he’s being prosecuted.”
Michael Dreeben argued for special counsel Jack Smith who brought charges against Trump. He countered by highlighting legal safeguards such as the use of grand juries and presenting allegations to them before deciding whether or not to bring an indictment, but Roberts dismissed this idea stating that relying on a prosecutor’s good faith may be insufficient in some cases due to how easy it is for a Grand Jury to approve charges.
The Chief Justice suggested the case should return to lower courts with more detailed legal reasoning and possible determinations of what actions charged could be considered part of Trump’s official duties versus his private conduct, which may have been overlooked or deemed immaterial previously during prior discussions relating solely to election certification proceedings related explicitly linked by President Biden’s Attorney General Merrick Garland last month when the special counsel was appointed.
Roberts has historically protected the office of presidency and written opinions in high-profile disputes involving Trump, but it remains unclear whether he will write an opinion that could be used to support a victory for former President Donald Trump during this case as many conservatives currently dominate the Supreme Court bench. The outcome may depend on who is given authorship authority should there indeed emerge consensus from any ruling eventually announced by Roberts and his colleagues in future decisions relating directly or indirectly linked with these proceedings against ex-President Donald J.Trump, whose 2024 Presidential Campaigns have already begun across multiple states around the US today!
Leave a Reply