Experts on Trump’s immunity claims: “Trump was not King” despite what he believes 

Trump’s claims that he has presidential immunity over civil and federal cases will likely be determined by the U.S. Supreme Court. And most conservative and liberal legal scholars believe the former president will lose. 

Trump’s legal argument 

Illustration. Image credit: Potashev Aleksandr / Shutterstock.com

Trump’s lawyers asked the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan’s decision to dismiss his immunity claims in the case alleging that the former president tried to overturn the 2020 elections. 

Claims of “double jeopardy” 

Judge, Judge Holding Documents, In court, Table
Image by DepositPhotos.com

The Supreme Court denied Jack Smith’s request to speed up the process and left the Court of Appeals to deal with it for now. Additionally, Trump’s lawyers claimed that due to his impeachment, a criminal trial would be double jeopardy. 

Not a King 

Image by DepositPhotos.com

Bennett Gershman, a former New York prosecutor and law professor at Pace University, told Salon, “Trump’s claim of absolute immunity for his actions to try to subvert the results of the 2020 electoral given the uncontested facts is preposterous, nonsensical, and a sure loser.” Gershman added that “monarchs may claim absolute immunity” and “Trump was not king” despite his beliefs.

“Weak” argument 

Image credit: Tinseltown / Shutterstock.com

Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani explained that the former president’s legal argument is “weak,” adding, “Trump is effectively using the executive immunity and double jeopardy appeal as a procedural tactic to delay his trial.” 

Delaying tactic 

Image Bia DepositPhotos.com

Rahmani also stated, “Trump’s best defense has always been to push his criminal trials past the November election because if he regains the White House, a sitting president can’t be prosecuted.” 

Drawing the line 

Trump, Trump lawyer,
Image by thenews2.com via DepositPhotos.com

Michael Waldman, head of the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School, spoke to the Daily Beast and revealed, “There have been so few presidents as crooked as Trump.” Waldman added how the Supreme Court must draw a line and say, “This was not just some random act he did while in office. This was his attempt to overthrow the Constitution.”

Not about the presidency

Illustration. Image credit: Joseph Sohm via Shutterstock

Waldman pointed out, “This was about the presidency. You can’t use presidential immunity… to cling to the presidency.” Waldman and Rahmani came to similar conclusions, though many are worried that the rule of law could be in danger because the court includes three justices Trump nominated. 

The whole thing is “ridiculous”

Illustration. Image credit: Shutterstock

Texas defense attorney Paul Saputo also spoke to the Daily Beast and said it was all “ridiculous.” He elaborated, “We’re not even going to have a 5-4 decision. I don’t think it’s going to be a close call. They realize that, in order for them to keep the country together, it’s got to be pretty unanimous.” 

Still, there is hope for the Supreme Court 

Illustration. Image credit: Depositphotos

Some argued that the Supreme Court would rule conservatively, meaning the justices would uphold the Constitution, regardless of their political affiliations. 

The downside

Dislike sign, thumb down
Image by DepositPhotos.com

Gershman still expressed concerns, “The longer they can delay the proceedings, the greater the likelihood that a court will defer a trial until after the 2024 election, assuming Trump is the candidate and the Supreme Court doesn’t get in the way.”

What would it mean for future presidents? 

Illustration. Image credit: mark reinstein / Shutterstock.com

Norman Eisen of the Brookings Institution and Joshua Kolb, a former law clerk for the Senate Judiciary Committee, wrote in an op-ed at CNN that granting Trump’s request for immunity would “derail the case” and “elevate future presidents above the law.”

“Uncharted territory”

Illustration. Image credit: Shutterstock

Attorney Bernard Alexander told Salon that Trump’s filing suggested “he was above the law because he heads the branch responsible for enforcing election law.” The lawyer stated that this would lead to zero accountability and added, “A president seeking to thwart the will of the electorate would never be subject to prosecution for sedition or insurrection.” 

Read Next: What Really Causes Donald Trump’s Skin to be So Orange

Photo by stock_photo_world / Shutterstock.com

Former President Donald Trump’s distinctive orange skin has captivated attention, sparking curiosity about its evolution from average pale over the years:

What Really Causes Donald Trump’s Skin to be So Orange

27 Things MAGA Movement Ruined Forever for People

Photo by MANDEL NGAN / AFP

How the MAGA movement left its mark on individuals and disrupted certain aspects of our everyday life forever:

27 Things MAGA Movement Ruined Forever for People

Court Finally Unseals Secretive Case of Jan 6 Offender

Image by Gallagher Photography / Shutterstock.com

Samuel Lazar sentenced for Jan. 6 insurrection; previously confidential case now revealed: Court Finally Unseals Secretive Case of Jan 6 Offender

Defamation lawsuit against Kari Lake advances while people compare her to Rudy Giuliani

Image by lev radin / Shutterstock.com

Kari Lake loses First Amendment right to accuse Maricopa County recorder; Arizona Republic ponders if she’s channeling Rudy Giuliani in her sleep : Defamation lawsuit against Kari Lake advances while people compare her to Rudy Giuliani

More Democrats are flipping in a crucial swing state than Republicans

Image by palinchak via Depositphotos.com

In Pennsylvania, a significant number of registered Democrats flipping is sending an unflattering signal to President Biden: More Democrats are flipping in a crucial swing state than Republicans