US Supreme Court: President has immunity for official acts during his presidency

V

This case raises a question of enduring importance: When can a former president be impeached for official actions taken during his presidency? Our nation has never needed an answer before. But in addressing this question today, unlike the political branches and the public at large, we cannot afford to focus solely, or even primarily, on the needs of the moment. In a case like this, focusing on “interim results” can have profound consequences for the separation of powers and the future of our Republic. Youngstown, 343 U.S., 634 (Jackson, J., concurring). Our perspective must be more far-sighted, for “

Our first president had that perspective. In his farewell address, George Washington reminded the Nation that “a government of as great strength as is consistent with the perfect security of liberty is necessary.” 35 Writings of George Washington 226 (J. Fitzpatrick ed. 1940). He warned that a government “too weak to withstand the enterprises of faction” could lead to “a fearful despotism,” “the alternate domination of one faction over another, exacerbated by the spirit of revenge.” Ibid., pp. 226–227. And the way to avoid this cycle, he explained, was to ensure that the powers of government remained “properly distributed and adjusted.” Ibid., p. 226.

It is these enduring principles that guide our decision in this case. The President is not immune from prosecution for his unofficial actions, and not everything the President does is official. The President is not above the law. But Congress cannot criminalize the President’s conduct in the performance of his Executive Branch duties under the Constitution. And the system of separated powers designed by the Framers has always required a vigorous, independent Executive Branch.

The President cannot therefore be impeached for exercising his basic constitutional powers and is entitled, at a minimum, to presumptive immunity from prosecution for all of his official actions. This immunity applies equally to all those who sit in the Oval Office, regardless of political views, policies, or party.

The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia is reversed and the case is remanded for further proceedings in accordance with that opinion.

That’s how it’s arranged.