As Trump grasps unprecedented power, the Supreme Court’s decision on presidential immunity looms large

The roiling debate over the strength of democratic restraints to keep Donald Trump in check when he returns to the White House in January has put a renewed focus on a divisive Supreme Court ruling that some fear could enable his worst impulses.

The roiling debate over the strength of democratic restraints to keep Donald Trump in check when he returns to the White House in January has put a renewed focus on a divisive Supreme Court ruling that some fear could enable his worst impulses. Trump’s sweeping election victory has relit fears on the left of an empowered president pushing the boundaries of his authority – only now with a precedent in hand that grants far-reaching immunity from criminal prosecution. Taken together, the political and legal alignment will usher Trump into a second term with unprecedented power following a campaign in which he vowed to fire special counsel Jack Smith “within two seconds” of his inauguration and has flirted with the idea that President Joe Biden himself “could be a convicted felon.” “For 250 years, the possibility of criminal prosecution operated as a guard rail on the conduct of our presidents,” said Neil Eggleston, a veteran attorney who served as White House counsel in the Obama administration. “That guard rail is now gone, and I see few if any others that will constrain President Trump.” In a highly anticipated ruling on July 1 that came over the objection of the three-justice liberal wing, the Supreme Court held that Trump enjoyed “absolute” immunity from prosecution for actions taken within his core constitutional powers and a more limited immunity for other official actions. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that Congress couldn’t criminalize a president’s conduct when he is “carrying out the responsibilities of the executive branch.”