North Carolina legal experts, politicians respond to Trump immunity ruling
RALEIGH, N.C. (WTVD) -- Monday morning's Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity sparked immediate reaction from both ends of the political spectrum.
In a 6-3 decision along ideological lines, the court found presidents are protected by immunity in certain, though not all, situations.
"The Court said for core presidential acts, there's absolute immunity. For official acts, there's a presumption of immunity. For unofficial acts, no immunity," said Jeanette Doran, President and General Counsel, North Carolina Institute for Constitutional Law.
In delivering the majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, "...under our system of separated powers, the President may not be prosecuted for exercising his core constitutional powers, and he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for his official acts. That immunity applies equally to all occupants of the Oval Office." However, the opinion pushed back on the former president's legal arguments, noting: "Trump asserts a far broader immunity than the limited one we have recognized."
"Trump can crow all he wants that this is a total victory. It isn't. But it also isn't a total loss. He did win on the idea that he may have some immunity for some of these official acts. We just don't know. That remains to be seen," said Doran.
Trump, applauding the decision on Truth Social, writing: "BIG WIN FOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND DEMOCRACY. PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!"
SEE ALSO | What happens next in Trump's DC election case after the Supreme Court's immunity decision
Republican National Committee Co-Chair Michael Whatley, who previously served as Chair of the NCGOP, writing on X: "Today's ruling is a victory for the rule of law and a reminder that the constitution outweighs the left's weaponization of the judicial system against President Trump and his allies."
Meanwhile, Democrats expressed anger about the decision.
"This is everything Donald Trump wanted and incredibly dangerous for our democracy. It essentially allows a President to commit criminal acts while in office with some gobbledy-gook from this Supreme Court about what constitutes an official action," said Rep. Wiley Nickel, who represents the 13th District.
In a statement, Deborah Ross, who represents the 2nd District, wrote:
"Today's decision marks a dark departure from a foundational pillar of our democracy - that no person is above the law. By ruling that a president has absolute immunity from prosecution for official actions while simultaneously refusing to draw a clear line between what constitutes official and unofficial actions, the conservative majority on the Supreme Court has elevated the presidency to a 'law-free zone.' We are a country built on the rule of law - not a nation of kings or dictators. I fear for the vitality and strength of our democracy after today's decision. A future president could be empowered to inflict irreparable harm on our nation with this level of immunity."4
This decision could alter whether Trump ultimately faces a federal trial for his role in trying to overturn his 2020 election loss, in which he's pled not guilty to four felony counts. It's now up to a lower court to determine which acts are shielded by immunity and which ones are not.
"We don't know what the lower court will do when they look at each specific factual allegation in the indictment. We also don't know what Jack Smith and the Special Counsel will do. He and his team might take a look at things and say 'we're not sure we've really got the goods when it comes to X,Y, and Z in the indictment,'" said Doran.
The timing could potentially assist Trump, who has spent significant time addressing legal cases thus far in the lead-up to the November election.
"I would be highly surprised if we get any sort of a final decision from the district court in terms of a trial conclusion by the time of the election," said Doran.
