The New Yorker:

The conservative Justices gutted the January 6th case—and have made it harder to prosecute any President.

By Amy Davidson Sorkin

On Monday morning, the Supreme Court, by a vote of 6–3, handed Donald Trump, who is under indictment in multiple jurisdictions, a victory by declaring that former Presidents have a great deal of immunity from criminal prosecution related to their actions while in office. “At least with respect to the President’s exercise of his core constitutional powers, this immunity must be absolute,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority—the six conservatives, three of whom were appointed by Trump. Roberts added that, even for official actions outside that constitutional core, a former President is entitled, at a minimum, to “presumptive immunity.” Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in a dissent joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, wrote that this ruling is “disastrous” and “reshapes the institution of the Presidency.” Trump is running for President again. What is startling is not only the protection the Court has given him but the license it has granted him and his successors for what any of them might do next.

Trump didn’t get everything he asked for from the Supreme Court—but only because he asked for so, so much, including that a criminal trial might not be possible absent an impeachment conviction. Trump got more than enough to turn the January 6th indictment brought against him by Jack Smith in Washington, D.C., into, at best, a shard of its former self. The same can likely be said for the indictment against him in Fulton County, Georgia, for some of the same acts; Trump has already tried to get that case dismissed on immunity grounds. And the decision may undercut the Espionage Act prosecution against him in Florida, too. “proud to be an american!” Trump wrote on Truth Social after the decision, in a series of posts about “Hoaxes” and “Witch Hunts.” He added, “Biden should now call off his ‘dogs.’ ”

Go to link