Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito said Thursday that criminally prosecuting an incumbent who narrowly lost an election, as opposed to knowing that the incumbent could step down peacefully, would destabilize the entire country. I wondered if it was possible.
Alito made the remarks Thursday as the Supreme Court was hearing arguments over whether President Trump should be granted immunity from prosecution on charges of trying to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. In arguments, a majority of the Supreme Court justices appeared to agree with former President Donald Trump’s lawyers.
This artist’s sketch shows, from left, Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John Roberts, and Samuel U.S. Supreme Court members during a debate over the legitimacy of former President Donald Trump. Associate Justice Alito and Associate Justice Elena Kagan are depicted. On April 25, 2024, at the Capitol in Washington, she was granted immunity from prosecution in a lawsuit accusing her of plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. (Dana Berkouteren, Associated Press)
“If the D.C. Circuit is correct that the president has the power to pardon himself before he leaves office, and that there is no immunity from prosecution, then the foreseeable result is that the president has the power to pardon himself before leaving office, and if the Isn’t that a pardon for what they could be prosecuted for?” Alito asked the government’s Michael Dreben.
Mr. Dreeben said he had doubts about this, arguing that it “assumes an administration unlike any we have ever had, with the exception of President Nixon.”
“The political consequences of a president who, aware of his involvement in wrongdoing and seeking to protect himself, asserted a heretofore unrecognized right of self-pardon, violate fundamental principles of our law. It seems contradictory. That person shall be the judge of his own case. I think these are sufficient deterrents to prevent this kind of dystopian regime from developing. “I think so,” he continued, prompting Alito to ask his next question about the consequences of not allowing the outgoing president to leave office peacefully.
“Let me end with this question: What does it take for a stable, functioning democratic society? That’s what we all want,” Alito said.
Look — don’t flinch! President Trump denounces unfair “Biden trial” as “election interference”:
“I am sure you all agree that in a stable democratic society, no matter how close or hard-fought the election, the incumbent candidate who loses the election is expected to step down peacefully. I think you will agree with that,” he continued. , prompting a “of course” from Dreeben.
“Good. Now, the incumbent, who lost a close and hard-fought election, is aware that the real possibility after leaving office is that the president will not be able to live out his retirement in peace, and that the president may be subject to criminal prosecution.” Knowing that, wouldn’t being a hostile political opponent lead us into a vicious cycle that destabilizes the functioning of our country as a democracy?” Alito added. “And if you look around the world, you’ll find countries that have witnessed this process where the losers are thrown into prison.”
As Breitbart News reported, “A federal trial court has ruled that… [special council Jack] Although Mr. Smith supports Mr. Trump not being immune from prosecution, Mr. Smith’s prosecution in Washington, D.C., is on hold until the Supreme Court considers it, likely in late June. ”
The case is trump vs usaUnited States Supreme Court No. 23-939.
