Slate News
What Next: How Bad is the Trump Immunity Ruling?
Jul 2, 2024
Law professor Richard Hasen from UCLA discusses the recent Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity, particularly focusing on the implications for Trump. The ruling distinguishes between absolute and presumptive immunity for official acts, raising concerns about accountability and the challenges of prosecuting a president. The podcast explores the complexity of differentiating between official and unofficial actions, highlighting the potential impact on future criminal cases involving Trump.
27:35
Episode guests
AI Summary
AI Chapters
Episode notes
Podcast summary created with Snipd AI
Quick takeaways
- The Supreme Court's ruling grants presidents like Trump substantial immunity from prosecution for acts committed while in office, distinguishing between absolute and presumptive immunity for official duties.
- The ruling affects Trump's ongoing criminal prosecutions, such as the January 6th case, leading to potential prolonged legal proceedings and significant consequences for future legal challenges.
Deep dives
Supreme Court Decision on Presidential Immunity
The Supreme Court's ruling granted substantial immunity to presidents like Trump from prosecution for acts committed while in office. The court distinguished between absolute immunity for core constitutional duties and presumptive immunity for duties within the official responsibility perimeter. This decision significantly hinders the possibility of prosecuting a president for unofficial actions, creating challenges in differentiating official from unofficial acts.
Remember Everything You Learn from Podcasts
Save insights instantly, chat with episodes, and build lasting knowledge - all powered by AI.
