Supreme Court Rules on Presidential Immunity in Trump v. United States

The Supreme Court held that former presidents have absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts taken within the core constitutional powers of the presidency, and presumptive immunity for other official acts. The Court remanded the case to determine which of the charged conduct constitutes official versus unofficial acts.

The 6-3 decision established a new framework for evaluating presidential immunity claims. The majority found that the separation of powers requires robust protection for presidential decision-making, as the threat of future prosecution could chill the exercise of executive authority.

The dissent argued that the ruling places the president above the law and creates a dangerous precedent with no basis in the Constitution's text or history.