Is the United States governed by a president or a king? Recent legal battles challenge Trump’s claims of absolute immunity, highlighting the delicate balance between democracy and dictatorship. While two courts rejected Trump’s assertion, conservative Supreme Court justices seemed eager to complicate matters.
According to the unanimous opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, Trump’s claim of unbounded authority to commit crimes violates the most fundamental check on executive power—the recognition and implementation of election results. Upholding a lower court’s take on the matter, the court emphasized that such actions undermine democracy.
Conservative justices on the Supreme Court appeared desperate to make a simple issue complex during oral arguments. Justice Alito argued that holding the president accountable could lead to lawlessness, raising concerns about the stability of democracy.
Trump’s legal counsel even suggested that the former president should have enjoyed the right to order a coup or political assassination without fear of legal consequences. However, this unprecedented assertion poses a greater risk to the executive branch’s integrity.
While some conservative justices challenged these extreme views, others seemed reluctant to hold the president accountable for his actions. Legal experts criticized the court’s right-wing bloc for prioritizing partisan interests over democratic principles.
The oral arguments were deemed “embarrassing” by Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe, who likened the proceedings to congressional showmanship. Despite the outcome, the delay caused by the hearing benefits Trump, allowing him to evade accountability.
The conservative legal movement’s willingness to entertain arguments that elevate one person above the law raises concerns about the state of constitutional government in America.