Trump Argues For Immunity Before Supreme Court

Attorneys for former President Donald Trump argued this week that he is subject to immunity from prosecution for his actions taken during his time in the White House. The legal filing came as the first criminal trial against him began in New York on Monday.

The legal filing from the former president’s legal team argued that the Constitution’s framers “viewed the prosecution of the Chief Executive as a radical innovation to be treated with great caution.”

Despite the argument from Trump’s attorneys, special counsel Jack Smith said that blanket immunity “would free the president from virtually all criminal law — even crimes such as bribery, murder, treason and sedition.”

A previous filing showed the former president’s attorneys arguing that a lack of immunity would “incapacitate every future president with de facto blackmail and extortion while in office.”

“President Trump moved to dismiss the indictment based on Presidential immunity,” read the legal filing. “The district court wrongfully held that a former President enjoys no immunity from criminal prosecution for his official acts. The D.C. Circuit affirmed, likewise incorrectly holding that a former President has no immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts.”

The president’s attorneys argued that Trump’s actions taken in the aftermath of the 2020 election were done in his capacity in the White House and was not eligible for prosecution.

The Supreme Court is expected to start hearing arguments regarding presidential immunity next week.

The former president wrote on social media that the eight criminal and civil cases against him were “Biden cases.”

Trump wrote that such an effort had “Never been done before in our Country” and that he faced “Crooked politicians and corrupt prosecutors and Judges.”

In Manhattan, the former president attended the first day of hs trial related to alleged payments to former adult film actress Stormy Daniels following a reported brief relationship. During the first day of the trial, no jurors were selected, with more than half of the prospective pool telling the court that they could not be impartial in judging the former president.