J. Michael Luttig, a former federal judge known for conservative leanings but vehement opposition to ex-President Donald Trump, condemned in recent days the possibility that the U.S. Supreme Court rules in the former White House occupant’s favor amid his claims of sweeping immunity.
“The Supreme Court of the United States would cut the heart out of America’s Democracy and the Rule of Law and unsoul the Nation were it to rule that an American president is immune from prosecution under the Constitution for attempting to overturn a presidential election and cling to power against the will of the American People,” Luttig wrote on X (formerly called Twitter).
Trump is claiming an extensive vision of immunity from prosecution specifically in the context of a criminal case that he is facing over his targeting after the last presidential election of its outcome, meaning Joe Biden’s victory.
Trump claims that what he was doing was just part of his official role as president on the idea that rooting out imagined fraud would serve the interests of the people of the United States. The problem, though, is that there’s never been any proof of systematic fraud in the 2020 presidential election, though Trump has never cut ties with the sweeping conspiracy theories. Trump, though, wants to shut down Special Counsel Jack Smith’s case.
Many were aghast at members of the U.S. Supreme Court even considering a possibility of the kind of immunity that Trump’s team was claiming, and one legal expert suggested on MSNBC that conservatives on the court were potentially in Trump’s pocket. Specifically, they were floating the possibility of such figures pursuing at least an intentional delay, helping to potentially push the trial beyond this year’s presidential election… which, in theory, Trump could win, upturning the underlying case against him. Some have pointed to apparent differences between the court’s handling of other proceedings vs. the immunity dispute, with the latter progressing more slowly.
