Supreme Court immunity ruling raises fears about future lawless presidents
Although the Supreme Court ruling on Monday concerned Donald Trump, it has major repercussions for future White House occupants.
WASHINGTON — When President Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon in 1974 it was under the assumption that his predecessor could have been prosecuted for his efforts to impede the investigation into the Watergate scandal.
But under the new rule implemented by the Supreme Court on Monday that partially immunized Donald Trump in his election interference case, there may not have been any need for such a pardon.
"Richard Nixon would have had a pass," John Dean, Nixon's White House Counsel, said on a call with reporters Monday.
The Supreme Court said core presidential functions such as communicating with other officials are absolutely immune from prosecution. And other acts that may straddle the line are presumptively immune, meaning a defendant can assume they are immune unless a prosecutor can prove otherwise.
Future presidents, unlike Nixon, will enter office knowing they can insulate themselves from prosecution as long as their allegedly illegal acts can be defended as exercises of a bedrock presidential power. Presidents who commit criminal acts can still face removal from office via the impeachment process.
Rating: 5