On Thursday the Supreme Court heard oral arguments for and against Donald Trump’s claims of absolute presidential immunity. The good news is that the Court appeared unlikely to just completely rule in his favor, agree that he should not face prosecution for anything he did in office, and kill the federal election case against him. The bad news is that, unsurprisingly, they’re not just going to tell him to fuck off, as some justices suggested that presidents should receive some immunity—a move that would potentially limit Special Counsel Jack Smith‘s case and delay a trial until after the November election. The insane news? That conservative justice Samuel Alito literally tried to argue that we should allow presidents to commit crimes without fear of prosecution in order to save democracy.
That’s right: Speaking to Michael Dreeben, and attorney representing the special counsel, Alito began by stating: “I’m sure you would agree with me that a stable democratic society requires that a candidate who loses an election, even a close one, even a hotly contested one, leave office peacefully, if that candidate is the incumbent?” Then, having started with a premise that all reasonable people would agree with, he went in with this:
If an incumbent who loses a very close, hotly contested election knows that a real possibility after leaving office is not that the president is going to be able to go off into a peaceful retirement, but that the president may be criminally prosecuted by a bitter political opponent, will that not lead us into a cycle that destabilizes the functioning of our country as a democracy?
If your brain hurts from trying to follow that, what Alito is saying here is that presidents need to know that they’ll never be prosecuted for any crimes they might commit in office, or democracy will collapse, because future officeholders might, say, try to overturn a free and fair election in order to stay in power and avoid criminal charges. And if that sounds completely absurd to you, you’re not alone. Responding to Alito’s hypothetical, Dreeben said, “I think it’s exactly the opposite, Justice Alito.”
X content
This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.
Alito’s desire to literally let presidents do anything they want could, of course, lead to terrible outcomes, which liberal justice Sonia Sotomayor unfortunately had to point out:
X content
This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.
Anyway, it’s obviously good news that the Court is unlikely to endorse Trump (and, seemingly, Alito’s) claim that presidents should enjoy absolute immunity for anything they do in office, but it’s really, really quite bad that the likely outcome of the proceedings will still be a huge win for the ex-president. Per The New York Times:
There did not seem to be a lot of urgency among the justices—especially the conservative ones—to ensure that the immunity question was resolved quickly. That left open the possibility that Mr. Trump could avoid being tried on charges of plotting to overturn the last election until well after voters went to the polls to decide whether to choose him as president in this election.
And if he is elected president, all of this will obviously go away.
A very good question (that he would probably answer by citing 17th-century laws to argue the lady president should be thrown in jail)
X content
This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.
Stop giving him ideas!
X content
This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.
Elsewhere!
“You Can’t Believe This Happened”: A “Surreal” Trial and Tabloid Tales of Donald Trump
Vanity Fair • Read More
Ex–National Enquirer publisher testifies about adult-film actress, others at Trump’s hush money trial
The Washington Post • Read More
More arrests and a canceled commencement as college antiwar rallies spread
The Washington Post • Read More
Elon Musk Clashes With Australian Court Over Violent Videos on X
NYT • Read More
Agent Removed From Harris’s Detail After “Distressing” Behavior
NYT • Read More
Poll: Trump remains vulnerable on abortion with independents, some Republicans
Politico • Read More
White House seizes on Mitch McConnell saying Trump stalled action on border security
Politico • Read More
Medical workers ask bite victims to stop bringing snakes to hospitals
UPI • Read More
More Great Stories From Vanity Fair
Anne Hathaway on Tuning Out the Haters and Embracing Her True Self
Scenes From the Knives-Out Feud Between Barbara Walters and Diane Sawyer
Eddie Redmayne, Liza Minnelli, and the Untold History of Cabaret
Deprived of His 12 Daily Diet Cokes, Trump Falls Asleep (Again) at Trial
While Melania Thinks the Hush Money Trial Is a “Disgrace”: Report
The 25 Best True-Crime Documentaries to Binge Right Now
From the Archive: The Devil in Bette Davis
Stay in the know and subscribe to Vanity Fair for just $2.50 $1 per month.
The post Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito Argues Presidents Must Be Allowed to Commit Federal Crimes or Democracy as We Know It Will Be Over appeared first on Vanity Fair.