Supreme Court’s Decisions on Presidential Immunity, Agency Authority Mean More Work for Lawyers, Judges, Panel Says

Legal experts told a panel on July 10 that two recent Supreme Court decisions on presidential immunity and bureaucratic power will generate a great deal of work for lawyers and judges.

Panelists speaking at a Heritage Foundation event in Washington focused on court rulings on the extent of President Donald Trump’s legal immunity in election interference cases and on the power of unelected agency officials to make regulations when a law is ambiguous.

The discussion took place after the court wrapped up its annual term on July 1. During that term, the Supreme Court issued 59 opinions on cases that had been argued over the preceding nine months. The justices are now on summer recess.

The July 1 ruling in Trump v. United States held that presidents, including former President Donald Trump, are entitled to “absolute immunity” from criminal prosecution for actions carried out within the scope of their constitutional authority. A president is also “entitled, at a minimum, to a presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts,” but “no immunity for unofficial acts,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote.

Read Full Article Here