Premium Only Content

TODAY: Trump Immunity Case Goes Before Supreme Court
It’s a big day for President Trump as the U.S. Supreme Court Justices heard oral arguments in Trump’s immunity case. Will the Supreme Court grant or deny Trump presidential immunity for official acts taken while he was President?
Here’s how we got to where we are today: Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Jan. 6 federal election case against President Trump accuses the former President of “obstruction of an official proceeding,” i.e., trying to overturn the 2020 election results. President Trump asserted that he had constitutional authority to investigate the validity of the 2020 election results.
Smith then argued that no President should have presidential immunity for official actions taken while in office: “A former President is subject to federal criminal prosecution for personal and official acts that violate valid criminal laws.” Such an argument means a President could be liable for any decision that goes wrong – a drone strike, for example. Trump refuted this outrageous claim and appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court to rule on the case.
The ACLJ filed an amicus brief in this massive case. We don’t believe that any President receives total blanket presidential immunity for any action as President. We have criminal laws on the books that would hold a President accountable if he, for example, took a bribe for appointing someone as an ambassador.
However, we believe that a President should have immunity for official decisions made while President. If a President is afraid to make tough decisions for fear of potential jail time, then the office of the President will be greatly weakened. As President Trump told reporters today, “If you don’t have immunity, you just have a ceremonial president.” He’s exactly right.
The oral arguments were ongoing while we were on air today, and from what we could tell, the Justices appeared to agree that no President should have blanket immunity, but they also didn’t believe in removing immunity completely. While it’s impossible to guess the outcome of a case, based on oral arguments, it appears that the justices may agree with our arguments.
-
8:45
American Center for Law and Justice
6 days agoJustice Barrett Declares Fiery Response ‘Warranted’
3.9K6 -
10:55
Nate The Lawyer
2 days ago $1.59 earnedPortland's WOKE Laws Stop ALL Arrests to Help Illegal Migrants Fight ICE.
27.9K23 -
3:06:32
Price of Reason
15 hours agoCharlie Kirk Investigation Continues | Remembering 9-11 | Robert Downey Jr. Doctor Doom Look Reveal
265K67 -
2:12:26
Inverted World Live
10 hours agoManhunt for Suspect in Charlie Kirk's Assassination Continues, NASA Reveals "Life" on Mars | Ep. 107
252K55 -
2:44:02
TimcastIRL
12 hours agoMedia Warns Of Civil War Following Charlie Kirk Assassination | Timcast IRL
481K364 -
2:59:56
Laura Loomer
12 hours agoEP143: Remembering Charlie Kirk (1993–2025)
115K76 -
58:04
Man in America
15 hours agoCharlie Kirk’s Assassination—An URGENT WARNING for America
125K173 -
1:22:15
Glenn Greenwald
13 hours agoCharlie Kirk Assassination Fallout: U.S. Reps Call for Censorship; Do Graphic Videos Serve the Public Interest? Plus: WIRED Reporter on the Dark Side of Surrogacy | SYSTEM UPDATE #513
230K198 -
1:48:36
Right Side Broadcasting Network
20 hours agoLIVE: President Trump Attends the Yankees Baseball Game - 9/11/25
210K29 -
1:54:32
Badlands Media
14 hours agoBadlands Media Special Coverage - FBI Press Conference on Charlie Kirk's Assassination
171K21