Trump v. United States (2024)

In August 2023 a federal grand jury indicted Donald Trump on charges arising from efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, brought by special counsel Jack Smith. Trump moved to dismiss, arguing that a former President is immune from criminal prosecution for acts taken while in office. The trial court and the D.C. Circuit rejected the claim, and the Supreme Court agreed to decide the question, the first time it had addressed criminal immunity for a former President.

On July 1, 2024, the Court ruled 6 to 3. Chief Justice John Roberts's opinion set out three tiers. For acts within the President's conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority, such as the power to remove officers or direct the Justice Department, immunity is absolute. For other official acts, the President has at least presumptive immunity, which prosecutors can overcome only by showing that prosecution would pose no danger of intruding on the executive branch's functions. For unofficial, private acts, there is no immunity. The Court also held that evidence of a President's official acts cannot be used to prove a crime based on unofficial conduct.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in dissent, wrote that the decision made the President a king above the law in his use of official power, while the majority argued that without immunity Presidents would be hesitant to act boldly and successors could prosecute predecessors for political reasons. The case was returned to the trial court to sort official from unofficial conduct, and it was dismissed after Trump won the 2024 election, under the Justice Department's policy against prosecuting a sitting President. The decision now defines the outer limit of criminal accountability for any President.