Schumer Proposes 'No Kings Act' Following SCOTUS Immunity Ruling
US Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) proposed on Thursday a bill called the 'No Kings Act,' which would reassert that presidents have no prosecutorial immunity for criminal acts and reverse a precedent established by the Supreme Court last month....
0:00
/1861
Facts
- US Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) proposed on Thursday a bill called the 'No Kings Act,' which would reassert that presidents have no prosecutorial immunity for criminal acts and reverse a precedent established by the Supreme Court last month.[1]
- SCOTUS ruled in Trump v. United States that all presidents have 'absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority' and 'at least presumptive immunity' for official acts but 'no immunity for unofficial acts.'[2][3]
- This comes as earlier this week Pres. Joe Biden called on Congress to pass a bill to limit presidential immunity and impose term limits and an enforceable ethics code on SCOTUS justices.[4]
- Joined by 34 Democratic co-sponsors, Schumer said the bill would be 'the fastest and most efficient method to correcting' what he called a grave precedent set by the court.[2]
- If passed, the bill would allow the Justice Department to indict any president or vice president — either current or former — in any applicable district court or the District of Columbia's district court, removing the SCOTUS appellate jurisdiction over any related criminal proceedings or challenges to the statute itself.[5]
- The 'No Kings Act' is silent about civil presidential immunity under Nixon v. Fitzgerald, on which Chief Justice Roberts based his decision in Trump v. United States.[6][3]
Sources: [1]Associated Press, [2]FOX News, [3]New York Times, [4]Breitbart, [5]Democrats and [6]Reason.com.
Narratives
- Democratic narrative, as provided by Truthout. The SCOTUS ruling was not based on legal precedent or thoughtful debate between conservative and liberal justices but rather an explicit attempt to shield future far-right presidents. Given the court's super-majority of pro-Trump justices, coupled with its current status of lifetime terms and lack of an ethics code, the only way to reign in their power and that of their friends in government is to codify a new law banning such ludicrous legal theories.
- Republican narrative, as provided by Townhall. The Democrats are projecting their nefarious goals with respect to SCOTUS onto the Republican Party. The court's ruling was a very mild one that simply asserted the right of presidents — and not just Trump, but all presidents from either party — to govern without fear of being prosecuted by their opponents after leaving office. The Democrats don't want to reform the court—they want to completely redesign it.
