US Historians Inform Supreme Court That They Reject Trump’s Immunity Claim

  • 2 months ago
US Historians Inform Supreme Court , That They Reject Trump’s Immunity Claim.
Former President Donald Trump faces multiple federal election interference charges stemming
from his attempt to overturn the 2020 election.
He and his legal team assert that he is immune to prosecution since he was president at the time.
But 15 historians have since "filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court" in an attempt to disprove Trump's claims, 'The Guardian' reports. .
But 15 historians have since "filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court" in an attempt to disprove Trump's claims, 'The Guardian' reports. .
According to the historians, Trump , "asserts that a doctrine of permanent
immunity from criminal liability for a president’s
official acts, while not expressly provided
by the Constitution, must be inferred." .
To justify this radical assertion, he
contends that the original meaning
of the Constitution demands it. , U.S. Historians, via amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court.
But no plausible historical
case supports his claim, U.S. Historians, via amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court.
Thomas Wolf, brief co-counsel and director of democracy initiatives at the Brennan Center.
said that Trump's claims of immunity
are "deeply un-American.".
From the birth of the country through
President Clinton’s acceptance of a plea
bargain in 2001 [avoiding indictment over
the Monica Lewinsky affair], it has been
understood that presidents can be prosecuted, Thomas Wolf, brief co-counsel and director of democracy
initiatives at the Brennan Center, via 'The Guardian'.
From the birth of the country through
President Clinton’s acceptance of a plea
bargain in 2001 [avoiding indictment over
the Monica Lewinsky affair], it has been
understood that presidents can be prosecuted, Thomas Wolf, brief co-counsel and director of democracy
initiatives at the Brennan Center, via 'The Guardian'.
From the birth of the country through
President Clinton’s acceptance of a plea
bargain in 2001 [avoiding indictment over
the Monica Lewinsky affair], it has been
understood that presidents can be prosecuted, Thomas Wolf, brief co-counsel and director of democracy
initiatives at the Brennan Center, via 'The Guardian'.
The Supreme Court must not delay
in passing down a ruling in this case, Thomas Wolf, brief co-counsel and director of democracy
initiatives at the Brennan Center, via 'The Guardian'