The Supreme Court recently delivered a ruling that grants former U.S. presidents significant immunity from prosecution for actions taken while in office, a decision that could have major implications for the legal battles facing former President Donald Trump. Legal expert Ryan Goodman provided insights and analysis on this landmark ruling in a recent interview with The Wall Street Journal.
The court’s decision has the potential to complicate efforts to prosecute Trump for his alleged involvement in attempting to undermine the results of the 2020 presidential election. Goodman explained the nuances of the ruling and how it may impact the various cases brought against Trump.
In the interview, Goodman delved into the key takeaways from the Supreme Court’s decision, highlighting the limitations it places on holding former presidents accountable for their actions while in office. He also discussed the potential implications for Trump’s legal battles moving forward, shedding light on what this ruling means for the ongoing cases against him.
As the legal battles surrounding Trump continue to unfold, it remains to be seen how this Supreme Court ruling will shape the trajectory of these cases. Goodman provided valuable insights on what lies ahead for Trump and the potential obstacles he may face in light of the court’s decision.
In a news landscape that is often complex and fast-paced, WSJ’s news explainers aim to break down the most important stories of the day into digestible pieces. By providing expert analysis and context, these explainers help audiences make sense of the latest developments and understand the implications of major rulings like the one handed down by the Supreme Court regarding presidential immunity.
Watch the video by The Wall Street Journal
Video “Trump’s Immunity: Legal Expert Breaks Down Supreme Court Ruling | WSJ” was uploaded on 07/02/2024 to Youtube Channel The Wall Street Journal
Shouldn't they also celebrate because this now protects BIDEN from any prosecution by TRUMP if TRUMP returns to office.
Mr. Goodman : you sound as if SCOTUS has covered up wrongfully __Far from truth: Court stated for ALL , and ANY president and also not for TOTAL inmunity- with those mentions That explanation is clean and accurate
If no man is above the law we need no qualified immunity for police, no immunity for prosecutors and no judicial immunity.. so then no one is above the law
Does this new Supreme Court Judges Ruling over PresidentialImmunity, does this now give any US President in the future.
Either immunity from the likes of War Crime charges, or Crimes against Humanity charges too?
Or immunity from Human Rights Crimes and Discrimination Charges, coming from United Nations too?
Or International charges being filed at either the International Criminal Court, or charges filled before the International Court of Justice too?
Yes or No?
Or has a sitting or former US President, actually got immunity from facing criminal charges, from other Countries?
For crimes committed outside the United States, or committed within their own countries and territories, or International Waters and/or International Airspace too.
Yes or No?
Or a US President is Immunity, now to an International Arrest Warrant, being issued by the UN, ICC or ICJ, against a sitting or former US President too?
Yes or No?
Maybe American and International News Media, should ask the US Supreme Court Judges, to answer these questions over US Presidential Immunity publicly.
The case is over, is it not, so they could answer these questions publicly, there is no reason why they could not.
Or was this Supreme Court Judges Ruling, given by Political motivated Republican Appointed Judges, wrongfully or illegally too?
To save Ex-President Donald Trump, from facing US Criminal Justice, in US Federal and State Courts, so Trump could run in the 2024 Presidential Election.
However, if Donald Trump and the Republican Party, not only loss the US Presidential Election, but loss the US Senate and US Congress too Elections to President Biden and the Democrats.
Where will that leave Donald Trump, still facing Criminal Charges and Court Cases?
Or where will that leave the Republican Appointed Judges, on the Supreme Court just waiting to be kick-off the Supreme Court soon or later?
By the newly elected Democrats President and Democrats in charge of both Houses too, out for these SupremeCourtJudges heads?
Very dangerous precedent giving any president the power of a dictator to use against anyone at anytime
There was nothing successful about Trump‘s policies except for article 42 because of the pandemic otherwise it was very unsuccessful stop lying to people stop lying stop lying about Trump Trump screwed everything up for everybody
It happenned on Joes watch! Not Trumps! Joe was taking a NAP while the SCOTUS deliberated but he LET them do it! Trump was tied up in COURT that day!
Liberal tears taste so sweet
Why do at day 1 not waiting 3 year
The beginning of the end
If Trump thinks he can unclassify something by thinking about it, I suppose he will also pardon himself as well
We all know the
difference between
' RIGHT & WRONG'….
That is… unless you are a MAGA TRUMPIST Supreme Court justice !
Transcript
Lies, Politics and Democracy
VIEW FILM
This program contains graphic content. Viewer discretion is advised.
HILLARY CLINTON:
Last night, I congratulated Donald Trump and offered to work with him on behalf of our country.
MITT ROMNEY:
I have just called President Obama to congratulate him on his victory.
JOHN McCAIN:
I had the honor of calling Sen. Barack Obama to congratulate him. [Booing]
JOHN McCAIN:
Please.
JOHN KERRY:
I spoke to President Bush and I offered him and Laura our congratulations on their victory.
AL GORE:
Now, the U.S. Supreme Court has spoken. While I strongly disagree with the court’s decision, I accept it.
BOB DOLE:
The president is my opponent, not my enemy. And I wish him well and I pledge my support.
GEORGE H.W. BUSH:
And America must always come first, so we will get behind this new president and wish him well.
MICHAEL DUKAKIS:
This nation faces major challenges ahead, and we must work together.
WALTER MONDALE:
He has won. We are all Americans. He is our president.
JIMMY CARTER:
—in bringing about an orderly transition of government in the weeks ahead.
BETTY FORD:
I congratulate you on your victory.
GEORGE McGOVERN:
Congratulations on your victory.
HUBERT HUMPHREY:
We’ve got a president-elect. He’s going to have my help. Cheers.
BARRY GOLDWATER:
I have no bitterness. No rancor at all.
RICHARD NIXON:
He will have my whole-hearted support.
ADLAI STEVENSON:
The people have rendered their verdict, and I gladly accept it.
THOMAS DEWEY:
I urge all Americans to unite behind you. And every good American will wholeheartedly accept the will of the people.
WENDELL WILLKIE:
I accept the result of the election with complete goodwill.
DONALD TRUMP:
This is an embarrassment to our country. We were getting ready to win this election. Frankly, we did win this election. We did win this election.
NARRATOR:
It was the lie that sparked an insurrection, an existential threat to American democracy created by decisions made over years. Partisan warfare. Moral compromise.
WHITE SUPREMACIST PROTESTERS:
[Chanting] White lives matter! White lives matter! White lives matter! White lives matter!
NARRATOR:
Warnings ignored.
DONALD TRUMP:
I alone can fix it.
DEMOCRACY IS FOR LOSERS
* they say……
Vote blue 💙 vote for freedom. 🗽🗽🗽🗽🗽🗽🗽🗽🗽🗽🗽🗽🗽🗽🗽🗽💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙
During the Revolutionary War and the Seige of Boston, Washington and the rest of the American War Council wrestled over the decision to attack the city, even if meant it's utter destruction. They ended up not doing it, but it very well could've happened. This is pricisely the situation a president would need immunity for. If, in order to defeat an invading force, it means the total innihilation of an entire city, then he needs to be able to make that decision without fear of personal consequences.
Land of the free
During the Constitutional Convention of 1787, upon leaving Independence Hall at the end of the convention, Benjamin Franklin was approached by a woman, Mrs. Elizabeth Powel, who asked him, “Well, Doctor, what have we got? A republic or a monarchy?” Franklin responded, “A republic, if you can keep it.”
A Republic if you can keep it. That you is “we, the people”. Let’s reverse this holding by scotus. It can’t stand.
If l was Joe Biden ld go crazy
Trump wouldn't desire immunity if he was a decent & legit person who didn't thrive off being a jaded criminal!
This is BEYOND BS, & people should be protesting before Trump tries to take that right away again!
This is not just for Trump, I wish people would understand this is for all future presidents who will be in power and who will need immunity from many of their presidential ask. For some reason everybody thinks this is just about Donald Trump. In this particular instance it’s serving a good purpose to straighten out some of these idiot prosecutors who were going after Trump simply because Biden has asked them to. So, realize this bill is for current, Joe Biden included, and all future presidents.
What is biden orders the bill to be enacted ? Would that be an official act ?
Rep. Joesph Morelle is presenting an amendment to reverse SCOTUS decision on immunity. Let's go Democrats. Vote Blue 💙 🗳
This creates a weird situation where the first president to fully abuse the new interpretation of the law, can become dictator. Biden could probably do it but might not want to. Trump seems very willing.
Pages 41-43
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf
How sad 😔
The one good thing about Biden becoming president is that the people woke up to see what the leftist agenda really is and now they should keep the common sense conservatives in power for quite a while until this country gets back on its feet
Just let Trump Seal Team 6 Biden and move into the White House and quit pretending the USA is a Democracy with Rule of Law anymore
Trump 24
NOPE. NOPE. how come he didnt need this in his first term?
This is straight up democrat PR this is why i dont watch WSJ
This guy's even lying in his explanation, the Supreme Court decision is only in regard to Official Acts of the Office of President of the United States of America, not any act or action as he says. It has to be official acts or actions.
The Magna Carta, the progenitor of our legal system, declared that “THE KING IS NOT ABOVE THE LAW.” Yet today we have a group of the smallest legal minds ever to be on the SCOTUS saying that the PRESIDENT IS ABOVE THE LAW. Such a corrupt, activist, law-writing bunch of political hacks. The GOP traditionally railed against increasing government (especially executive) power yet today wants an all-powerful King/president, more powerful than Medieval English monarchs, while they seek to take all rights from the citizenry and put it in the hands of government, especially the executive. How could the GOP lose its way so badly?
Nice compilation with rational explanations.
on his person it appears he was ever determined for the presidency
He is not the president !!!
Yall do realize this protects crooked joe as well
Disgusting. Our country is so done.
The Democrats don’t like it when they didn’t get Trump indicted and he’s running for President and Biden is upset about being the worst President in America he’s created this problem and now they want to change how SCOTUS works
Let me break it down. Anything is legal when you appoint the judge(s).
I never understood why people even try to get Trump on his speech. That speech was, in essence, a call for peaceful protest to pressure elected officials to do what the protestors wanted. If that's criminal, how easy would it be to make almost all activism illegal? If that's an incitement to violence due to the riot, wouldn't most or all activism also be criminal as soon as a riot breaks out? If you can push the line to make the riot an attempted insurrection, what would a pro-Hamas riot be if not terrorism??
Either
– Republicans and the majority of SCOTUS thinks Democrats are moral angels who would never abuse this total immunity
OR
– This isn't nearly as bad as the left claims
Is the decision retroactive or prospective in application?
Trump rallies the base after immunity ruling and debate: https://on.wsj.com/3VMRB4U