{"id":7735,"date":"2024-07-04T14:11:04","date_gmt":"2024-07-04T18:11:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/?p=7735"},"modified":"2024-07-04T14:11:04","modified_gmt":"2024-07-04T18:11:04","slug":"supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court Rules On Presidential Immunity"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In perhaps the most significant case of this current term, the Supreme Court gave an opinion on the hotly debated matter of presidential immunity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">By a 6-3 party line, 119-page decision authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court ruled that a U.S. President does have immunity from prosecution for actions taken while acting under the official capacity pertaining to the offices. However, that immunity does not apply to actions taken outside of those capacity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">While the ruling addresses a \u201cPresident,\u201d it is mainly about a person: Donald Trump. Upon the ruling, the Court sent the matter down to lower courts to determine which actions were in official capacity, and which, if any, were not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Here now is the critical text for the ruling in question:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>\u201c<\/strong>Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts. Pp. 5\u201343.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u201c(a) This case is the first criminal prosecution in our Nation\u2019s history of a former President for actions taken during his Presidency. Determining whether and under what circumstances such a prosecution may proceed requires careful assessment of the scope of Presidential power under the Constitution. The nature of that power requires that a former President have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure in office. At least with respect to the President\u2019s exercise of his core constitutional powers, this immunity must be absolute. As for his remaining official actions, he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity. Pp. 5-15.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u201c(1) Article II of the Constitution vests \u201cexecutive Power\u201d in \u201ca President of the United States of America.\u201d \u00a71, cl. 1. The President has duties of \u201cunrivaled gravity and breadth.\u201d&nbsp; Trump v. Vance, 591 U. S. 786, 800.&nbsp; His authority to act necessarily \u201cstem[s] either from an act of Congress or from the Constitution itself.\u201d Youngstown Sheet &amp; Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U. S. 579, 585. In the latter case, the President\u2019s authority is sometimes \u201cconclusive and preclusive.\u201d Id., at 638 (Jackson, J., concurring). When the President exercises such authority, Congress cannot act on, and courts cannot examine, the President\u2019s actions. It follows that an Act of Congress &#8211; either a specific one targeted at the President or a generally applicable one &#8211; may not criminalize the President\u2019s actions within his exclusive constitutional power. Neither may the courts adjudicate a criminal prosecution that examines such Presidential actions. The Court thus concludes that the President is absolutely immune from criminal prosecution for conduct within his exclusive sphere of constitutional authority. Pp. 6-9.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u201c(2) Not all of the President\u2019s official acts fall within his \u201cconclusive and preclusive\u201d authority. The reasons that justify the President\u2019s absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for acts within the scope of his exclusive constitutional authority do not extend to conduct in areas where his authority is shared with Congress. To determine the President\u2019s immunity in this context, the Court looks primarily to the Framers\u2019 design of the Presidency within the separation of powers, precedent on Presidential immunity in the civil context, and criminal cases where a President resisted prosecutorial demands for documents.&nbsp; P.9.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u201c(i) The Framers (of the Constitution) designed the Presidency to provide for a \u201cvigorous\u201d and \u201cenergetic\u201d Executive. The Federalist No. 70, pp. 471-472 (J. Cooke ed. 1961) (A. Hamilton). They vested the President with \u201csupervisory and policy responsibilities of utmost discretion and sensitivity.\u201d Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U. S. 731, 750. Appreciating the \u201cunique risks\u201d that arise when the President\u2019s energies are diverted by proceedings that might render him \u201cunduly cautious in the discharge of his official duties,\u201d the Court has recognized Presidential immunities and privileges \u201crooted in the constitutional tradition of the separation of powers and supported by our history.\u201d Id., at 749, 751, 752, n. 32. In Fitzgerald, for instance, the Court concluded that a former President is entitled to absolute immunity from \u201cdamages liability for acts within the \u2018outer perimeter\u2019 of his official responsibility.\u201d Id., at 756. The Court\u2019s \u201cdominant concern\u201d was to avoid \u201cdiversion of the President\u2019s attention during the decisionmaking process caused by needless worry as to the possibility of damages actions stemming from any particular official decision.\u201d&nbsp; Clinton v. Jones, 520 U. S. 681, 694, n. 19.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u201cBy contrast, when prosecutors have sought evidence from the President, the Court has consistently rejected Presidential claims of absolute immunity. During the treason trial of former Vice President Aaron Burr, for instance, Chief Justice Marshall rejected President Thomas Jefferson\u2019s claim that the President could not be subjected to a subpoena. Marshall simultaneously recognized, however, the existence of a \u201cprivilege\u201d to withhold certain \u201cofficial paper[s].\u201d United States v. Burr, 25 F. Cas. 187, 192 (No. 14,694) (CC Va.). And when a subpoena issued to President Richard Nixon, the Court rejected his claim of \u201cabsolute privilege.\u201d&nbsp; United States v. Nixon, 418 U. S. 683, 703. But recognizing \u201cthe public interest in candid, objective, and even blunt or harsh opinions in Presidential decisionmaking,\u201d it held that a \u201cpresumptive privilege\u201d protects Presidential communications. Id., at 708. Because that privilege \u201crelates to the effective discharge of a President\u2019s powers,\u201d id., at 711, the Court deemed it \u201cfundamental to the operation of Government and inextricably rooted in the separation of powers under the Constitution.\u201d Id., at 708. Pp. 9-12.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u201c(ii) Criminally prosecuting a President for official conduct undoubtedly poses a far greater threat of intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch than simply seeking evidence in his possession.&nbsp; The danger is greater than what led the Court to recognize absolute Presidential immunity from civil damages liability &#8211; that the President would be chilled from taking the \u201cbold and unhesitating action\u201d required of an independent Executive.&nbsp; Fitzgerald, 457 U. S., at 745. Although the President might be exposed to fewer criminal prosecutions than civil damages suits, the threat of trial, judgment, and imprisonment is a far greater deterrent and plainly more likely to distort Presidential decisionmaking than the potential payment of civil damages. The hesitation to execute the duties of his office fearlessly and fairly that might result when a President is making decisions under \u201ca pall of potential prosecution,\u201d McDonnell v. United States, 579 U. S. 550, 575, raises \u201cunique risks to the effective functioning of government,\u201d Fitzgerald, 457 U. S., at 751. But there is also a compelling \u201cpublic interest in fair and effective law enforcement.\u201d Vance, 591 U. S., at 808.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u201cTaking into account these competing considerations, the Court concludes that the separation of powers principles explicated in the Court\u2019s precedent necessitate at least a presumptive immunity from criminal prosecution for a President\u2019s acts within the outer perimeter of his official responsibility. Such an immunity is required to safeguard the independence and effective functioning of the Executive Branch, and to enable the President to carry out his constitutional duties without undue caution. At a minimum, the President must be immune from prosecution for an official act unless the Government can show that applying a criminal prohibition to that act would pose no \u201cdangers of intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch.\u201d Fitzgerald, 457 U. S., at 754. Pp. 12-15.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u201c(3) As for a President\u2019s unofficial acts, there is no immunity. Although Presidential immunity is required for official actions to ensure that the President\u2019s decisionmaking is not distorted by the threat of future litigation stemming from those actions, that concern does not support immunity for unofficial conduct. Clinton, 520 U. S., at 694, and n. 19. The separation of powers does not bar a prosecution predicated on the President\u2019s unofficial acts. P. 15.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u201c(b) The first step in deciding whether a former President is entitled to immunity from a particular prosecution is to distinguish his official from unofficial actions.&nbsp; In this case, no court thus far has drawn that distinction, in general or with respect to the conduct alleged in particular. It is therefore incumbent upon the Court to be mindful that it is \u201ca court of final review and not first view.\u201d Zivotofsky v. Clinton, 566 U. S. 189, 201. Critical threshold issues in this case are how to differentiate between a President\u2019s official and unofficial actions, and how to do so with respect to the indictment\u2019s extensive and detailed allegations covering a broad range of conduct.&nbsp; The Court offers guidance on those issues. Pp. 16\u201332.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u201c(1) When the President acts pursuant to \u201cconstitutional and statutory authority,\u201d he takes official action to perform the functions of his office. Fitzgerald, 456 U. S., at 757.&nbsp; Determining whether an action is covered by immunity thus begins with assessing the President\u2019s authority to take that action. But the breadth of the President\u2019s \u201cdiscretionary responsibilities\u201d under the Constitution and laws of the United States frequently makes it \u201cdifficult to determine which of [his] innumerable \u2018functions\u2019 encompassed a particular action.\u201d Id., at 756. The immunity the Court has recognized therefore extends to the \u201couter perimeter\u201d of the President\u2019s official responsibilities, covering actions so long as they are \u201cnot manifestly or palpably beyond [his] authority.\u201d&nbsp; Blassingame v. Trump, 87 F. 4th 1, 13 (CADC).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u201cIn dividing official from unofficial conduct, courts may not inquire into the President\u2019s motives. Such a \u201chighly intrusive\u201d inquiry would risk exposing even the most obvious instances of official conduct to judicial examination on the mere allegation of improper purpose.&nbsp; Fitzgerald, 457 U. S., at 756. Nor may courts deem an action unofficial merely because it allegedly violates a generally applicable law. Otherwise, Presidents would be subject to trial on \u201cevery allegation that an action was unlawful,\u201d depriving immunity of its intended effect.<strong>\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">After the decision dropped, there was reaction from both presidential candidates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u201cBIG WIN FOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND DEMOCRACY. PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!\u201d Trump posted on his Truth Social platform.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u201cToday&#8217;s ruling doesn&#8217;t change the facts, so let&#8217;s be very clear about what happened on January 6 (2021): Donald Trump snapped after he lost the 2020 election and encouraged a mob to overthrow the results of a free and fair election.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u201cThe American people already rejected Donald Trump&#8217;s self-obsessed quest for power once &#8211; Joe Biden will make sure they reject it for good in November.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In perhaps the most significant case of this current term, the Supreme Court gave an opinion on the hotly debated matter of presidential immunity. By a 6-3 party line, 119-page decision authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court ruled that a U.S. President does have immunity from prosecution for actions taken while acting under [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":5819,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7735","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-topstories"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.2 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Supreme Court Rules On Presidential Immunity -<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Supreme Court Rules On Presidential Immunity -\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"In perhaps the most significant case of this current term, the Supreme Court gave an opinion on the hotly debated matter of presidential immunity. By a 6-3 party line, 119-page decision authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court ruled that a U.S. President does have immunity from prosecution for actions taken while acting under [&hellip;]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-07-04T18:11:04+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/U.S.-Supreme-Court-after-Jackson-2022.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1500\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1000\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/#\/schema\/person\/7e100b844f82f76718c8dfa5840bb1e5\"},\"headline\":\"Supreme Court Rules On Presidential Immunity\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-07-04T18:11:04+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/\"},\"wordCount\":1690,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/U.S.-Supreme-Court-after-Jackson-2022.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Top Stories\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/\",\"name\":\"Supreme Court Rules On Presidential Immunity -\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/U.S.-Supreme-Court-after-Jackson-2022.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-07-04T18:11:04+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/#\/schema\/person\/7e100b844f82f76718c8dfa5840bb1e5\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/U.S.-Supreme-Court-after-Jackson-2022.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/U.S.-Supreme-Court-after-Jackson-2022.jpg\",\"width\":1500,\"height\":1000,\"caption\":\"Formal group photograph of the Supreme Court as it was been comprised on June 30, 2022 after Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson joined the Court. The Justices are posed in front of red velvet drapes and arranged by seniority, with five seated and four standing. Seated from left are Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., and Justices Samuel A. Alito and Elena Kagan. Standing from left are Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Credit: Fred Schilling, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Supreme Court Rules On Presidential Immunity\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/\",\"name\":\"\",\"description\":\"A Household Name Since 2000\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/#\/schema\/person\/7e100b844f82f76718c8dfa5840bb1e5\",\"name\":\"Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/57a51484ffde9c2692054b50de017c173a415ec2a24ca437ec9bd04c6309bd01?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/57a51484ffde9c2692054b50de017c173a415ec2a24ca437ec9bd04c6309bd01?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/57a51484ffde9c2692054b50de017c173a415ec2a24ca437ec9bd04c6309bd01?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Admin\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/author\/admin\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Supreme Court Rules On Presidential Immunity -","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Supreme Court Rules On Presidential Immunity -","og_description":"In perhaps the most significant case of this current term, the Supreme Court gave an opinion on the hotly debated matter of presidential immunity. By a 6-3 party line, 119-page decision authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court ruled that a U.S. President does have immunity from prosecution for actions taken while acting under [&hellip;]","og_url":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/","article_published_time":"2024-07-04T18:11:04+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1500,"height":1000,"url":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/U.S.-Supreme-Court-after-Jackson-2022.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/"},"author":{"name":"Admin","@id":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/#\/schema\/person\/7e100b844f82f76718c8dfa5840bb1e5"},"headline":"Supreme Court Rules On Presidential Immunity","datePublished":"2024-07-04T18:11:04+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/"},"wordCount":1690,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/U.S.-Supreme-Court-after-Jackson-2022.jpg","articleSection":["Top Stories"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/","url":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/","name":"Supreme Court Rules On Presidential Immunity -","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/U.S.-Supreme-Court-after-Jackson-2022.jpg","datePublished":"2024-07-04T18:11:04+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/#\/schema\/person\/7e100b844f82f76718c8dfa5840bb1e5"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/U.S.-Supreme-Court-after-Jackson-2022.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/U.S.-Supreme-Court-after-Jackson-2022.jpg","width":1500,"height":1000,"caption":"Formal group photograph of the Supreme Court as it was been comprised on June 30, 2022 after Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson joined the Court. The Justices are posed in front of red velvet drapes and arranged by seniority, with five seated and four standing. Seated from left are Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., and Justices Samuel A. Alito and Elena Kagan. Standing from left are Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Credit: Fred Schilling, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/2024\/07\/04\/supreme-court-rules-on-presidential-immunity\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Supreme Court Rules On Presidential Immunity"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/","name":"","description":"A Household Name Since 2000","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/#\/schema\/person\/7e100b844f82f76718c8dfa5840bb1e5","name":"Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/57a51484ffde9c2692054b50de017c173a415ec2a24ca437ec9bd04c6309bd01?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/57a51484ffde9c2692054b50de017c173a415ec2a24ca437ec9bd04c6309bd01?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/57a51484ffde9c2692054b50de017c173a415ec2a24ca437ec9bd04c6309bd01?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Admin"},"url":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/author\/admin\/"}]}},"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/U.S.-Supreme-Court-after-Jackson-2022.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7735","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7735"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7735\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7736,"href":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7735\/revisions\/7736"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5819"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7735"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7735"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/localtalkweekly.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7735"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}