Former President Donald Trump’s attorney is arguing before the Supreme Court that assassinating a political rival could be considered an official presidential act immune from prosecution.
The nation’s highest courts heard oral arguments in the 45th president’s sweeping claim to immunity from prosecution on Thursday.
And Justice Sonia Sotomayor sought to press Trump’s lawyer John Sauer on the breadth of his immunity claim.
“If the president decides that his rival is a corrupt person and he orders the military or orders someone to assassinate him, is that within his official acts for which he can give immunity?” Sotomayor asked.
Sauer responded, “It would depend on the hypothetical.”
“But we can see that could well be an official act,” he added.
Listen to the exchange below:
Sotomayor: If the president decides that his rival is a corrupt person and he orders the military to assassinate him, is that within his official acts for which he can give immunity? pic.twitter.com/mJCAeE4sXx
— Acyn (@Acyn) April 25, 2024
Sotomayor then asked why it would be immune as such an order would be driven by personal motives, not for the good of the country.
Justice Elena Kagan chimed in to aske if it would be an official act by the president, covered by immunity, if he order the military to stage a coup.
Sauer initially responded by noting there are some laws that would prevent the military from carrying out a coup. However, he added that by the standard he is advancing, “That may well be an official act.”
Kagan: How about if the president orders the military to stage a coup?
— Acyn (@Acyn) April 25, 2024
Sauer: If one adopted the test we advanced, that might well be an official act pic.twitter.com/aABeWLxbyy
Still, he stated a president could be prosecuted for an “official act” such as staging a coup if he had been impeached and convicted.
In January, Trump took to Truth Social to argue presidents should have an incredible level of immunity, writing, “A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES MUST HAVE FULL IMMUNITY, WITHOUT WHICH IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE FOR HIM/HER TO PROPERLY FUNCTION. ANY MISTAKE, EVEN IF WELL INTENDED, WOULD BE MET WITH ALMOST CERTAIN INDICTMENT BY THE OPPOSING PARTY AT TERM END.”
“EVEN EVENTS THAT ‘CROSS THE LINE’ MUST FALL UNDER TOTAL IMMUNITY, OR IT WILL BE YEARS OF TRAUMA TRYING TO DETERMINE GOOD FROM BAD. HERE MUST BE CERTAINTY,” he insisted.
Finally, Trump claimed, “ALL PRESIDENTS MUST HAVE COMPLETE [and] TOTAL PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY, OR THE AUTHORITY [and] DECISIVENESS OF A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES WILL BE STRIPPED [and] GONE FOREVER. HOPEFULLY THIS WILL BE AN EASY DECISION. GOD BLESS THE SUPREME COURT.”
