The Supreme Court ruled Monday that former President Donald J. Trump is entitled to certain immunity from prosecution, a decision that could effectively delay the trial of the case against him on charges of plotting to overturn the 2020 election.
The vote was 6-3, split along party lines.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts, writing the majority opinion, said Trump has immunity from liability for acts performed in the course of his official duties.
“The President is not above the law,” the Chief Justice wrote, “but Congress cannot criminalize the President's conduct in carrying out executive responsibilities under the Constitution. And the system of separation of powers designed by the Framers has always required a vigorous and independent executive branch. Thus, the President cannot be prosecuted for the exercise of core Constitutional powers and, at a minimum, the President has a presumptive right to immunity from prosecution for all acts of official business.”
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in her dissent, said the ruling was seriously wrong.
“Today's decision to grant a former president immunity is a sea change for the presidency,” she wrote. “It makes a mockery of the fundamental principle underlying our Constitution and political system: that no man is above the law.”
The justices said there was a crucial distinction between public and private business and sent the case back to a lower court for further analysis.
It was not immediately clear how long the delay would be, but a trial before the election seems increasingly unlikely: If Trump wins the vote, he could order the Justice Department to drop the charges.
Trump has argued that he is entitled to absolute immunity from prosecution, relying on a broad understanding of the separation of powers and a 1982 Supreme Court case that gives the president such immunity in civil lawsuits for actions taken within the “periphery” of his official duties.
A lower court rejected that argument.
“Whatever immunity a sitting president may enjoy, there can be only one chief executive officer of the United States at a time, and the position does not confer lifetime 'get out of jail free' immunity,” wrote Judge Tanya S. Chutkan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit unanimously agreed. “For purposes of this criminal case, former President Trump has become a citizen of the United States with the same right to a defense as any other criminal defendant,” the panel wrote in an unsigned decision. “However, the executive immunity that protected former President Trump while he was president no longer protects him from this prosecution.”
The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case and said it would decide the question, “whether and, if so, to what extent former presidents enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct allegedly related to their official duties while in office.”
The court has heard two other cases this term related to the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.
In March, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected an attempt to bar Trump from voting under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which says anyone who participated in an insurrection cannot hold public office. The court did not discuss whether Trump was covered by the clause, but ruled that states cannot use it to bar a presidential candidate from the ballot.
The court ruled Friday that federal prosecutors improperly used the obstruction statute to prosecute some members of the pro-Trump mob that stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Two of the four charges against Trump are based on this statute.
The court quickly ruled to restore Trump's voting rights, hearing arguments one month after agreeing to hear the case and issuing a ruling another month later.
The immunity case has been moving at a fairly slow pace. In December, Jack Smith, the special counsel overseeing the prosecution, urged the Supreme Court to hear the case immediately, bypassing the appeals courts. “It is of vital public importance that the defendants' immunity claims be resolved in this Court,” he wrote, adding that “only this Court can resolve them definitively.”
The justices denied Smith's petition 11 days after it was filed, in a brief order that specified no dissent.
After the appeals court ruled against Trump, he asked the Supreme Court to step in. Sixteen days later, on February 28, the Supreme Court agreed to hear Trump's appeal, scheduling arguments for the final day of the session nearly two months later. Another two months passed.
During arguments, several conservative justices indicated they would not look into the specifics of the allegations against Trump. Instead, they said the Supreme Court should rule on presidential powers generally.
“We write rules that are timeless,” Justice Neil M. Gorsuch said.