WASHINGTON (CN) — In the hours after the Supreme Court ruled Monday that presidents, including former President Donald Trump, cannot be held criminally liable for official acts, Democratic members of Congress issued grave warnings for what the high court decision could mean for democracy.
Lawmakers accusing the court’s conservative majority of carrying water for Trump even suggested legislative action was on the way to hold the justices to account.
In a 6-3 ruling, the court held that presidents no longer in office have absolute immunity for core executive powers and limited immunity for other actions taken in an official capacity. The justices did not delineate the borders of “official actions” nor whether Trump’s efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election — the case’s bedrock issue — constituted such an act.
Despite that ambiguity, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said the ruling gives Trump broad license to violate the law.
“The very basis of our judicial system is that no one is above the law,” the Democratic leader said Monday in a statement. “Treason or incitement of an insurrection should not be considered a core constitutional power afforded to a president. This decision undermines the credibility of the Supreme Court and suggests that political influence trumps all in our courts today.”
Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin, who as chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee has accused some of the high court’s justices of acting on the whims of conservative legal activists, slammed the decision as awarding not only Trump but also all future presidents legal cover to abuse the levers of power.
Durbin took aim at Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito for refusing to recuse themselves from the immunity case. Both jurists have faced calls to step away from election-related cases amid swirling questions about their impartiality: Thomas’s wife was involved in efforts to overturn the 2020 election, and Alito was recently implicated in reports that right-wing symbols were displayed outside his homes following the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot.
The Illinois Democrat said it was “disgraceful” that Thomas and Alito joined Monday's ruling when “the appearance of impropriety or partiality require recusal.”
Rhode Island Senator Sheldon Whitehouse is one of the Senate’s leading Democratic voices for Supreme Court ethics reform. He said in a post on X, formerly Twitter, that the immunity ruling was a “blaring warning” to voters about the antidemocratic forces at work in the high court and in the Republican party.
“The far-right radicals on the Court have essentially made the President a monarch above the law, the Founding Fathers’ greatest fear,” Whitehouse wrote.
Some Democrats vowed that the Supreme Court’s move to expand the power of the executive would not go unanswered.
“Shame on the United States Supreme Court,” said Georgia Representative Hank Johnson, the Democratic ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee’s courts subpanel, “and shame on Congress if we sit back and do nothing to reign in this recklessly out of control Court!”
Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who sits on the House Judiciary Committee, said she would file articles of impeachment next week when lawmakers return from their Independence Day recess.
“The Supreme Court has become consumed by a corruption crisis beyond its control,” she said. “Today’s ruling represents an assault on American democracy. It is up to Congress to defend our nation from this authoritarian capture.”
Congress has the power to impeach justices of the Supreme Court — but it was unclear Monday who exactly Ocasio-Cortez would try to remove. Under House rules, the New York Democrat could bring articles impeachment up as a privileged motion, forcing a vote on the move even in the Republican-controlled chamber.
It’s unlikely that any measure to remove a Supreme Court justice would make it out of the House, though.
Republicans meanwhile framed Monday’s ruling as a win for former President Trump and a defeat for what they have long framed as politically motivated prosecution against him.
“The court clearly states that presidents are entitled to immunity for their official acts,” House Speaker Mike Johnson said in a statement Monday. “That decision is based on the obviously unique power and position of the presidency and comports with the Constitution and common sense.”
South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham said that the Supreme Court ruling and its implications for the future of the executive branch made “perfect sense.”
“Presidents have specific designated constitutional authorities and responsibilities,” he said. “These core constitutional authorities specifically granted to the presidency must come with absolute immunity, or we will have chaos in America forever.”
Graham added that what counts as an “official act” under the new high court precedent would be determined by “factual analysis” in the future, with courts presuming in favor of presidential immunity.
“Today is a good day for President Trump and a good day for America,” he said.
Follow @BenjaminSWeiss
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
