After the Supreme Court ruled that the president enjoys broad immunity in his official duties, President Biden delivered a speech blasting the court in a manner that many observers considered unprecedented.
“I say no,” Biden declared Monday in an evening speech reacting to the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision in Trump’s favor, backing up the claims of immunity supporters.
“This country was founded on the principle that in America there is no king, that we are all equal before the law,” Biden said, calling the decision a “dangerous precedent because the power of the president will no longer be limited by the law…”
In its ruling, the court said the president is immune from prosecution for official acts “within the scope of his constitutional authority,” limiting Trump’s potential liability.
State Democratic leaders endorse Biden after debate
While an analysis of presidential responses to Supreme Court decisions reveals some past examples, experts Fox News Digital spoke to suggested Biden’s response is indeed unprecedented.
Mark Paoletta, who worked with Justice Clarence Thomas on his 1991 confirmation, called Biden’s attack on the Supreme Court “dangerous.”
“Obama criticized one case in his State of the Union address, which was bad enough, but Biden used a prime-time national address to slam the Supreme Court over immunity. … He didn’t have the courage or perhaps the mental acuity to take the questioning,” Paoletta said.
He added that the president’s attacks on specific justices, including Justice Thomas, regarding their private travels were similarly unprecedented.
“The last time Biden attacked Thomas, it didn’t work,” he said. “After Biden tried to destroy Thomas during his 1991 confirmation hearing, Thomas launched one of the most spectacular attacks in history, calling the Biden-led attack a ‘high-tech lynching.'”
Kyle Brosnan, lead counsel for the Heritage Foundation’s oversight project focused on government accountability, said Biden’s stance on the Supreme Court is unprecedented insofar as it’s part of a recent overall ideological trend.
Economy, border, abortion divide Biden’s hometown as residents speak out
“I see President Biden’s comments as another data point in a long-running campaign by the left to delegitimize the Supreme Court because they don’t like its decisions,” he said.
“[The Trump immunity decision] This is a victory for the presidency, and President Biden should celebrate that he will likely avoid possible prosecution for weaponizing the Justice Department to go after his political opponents.”
Republican Senator Tim Scott last week accused Biden of “making the Supreme Court a political target” and said, “Joe Biden has become the greatest threat to American democracy today.”
George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley appeared on Fox News Radio to discuss the president’s rebuttal, adding that he has previously written that Biden is the most anti-free speech president since former President John Adams.
” [Biden] “It’s really disturbing because it’s a symbol of loyalty to the Constitution,” Turley said.
Earlier, during his State of the Union address, Biden said Roe v. Wade was “righteous” and mocked the Republicans sitting across from him by asking, “My goodness, what other freedoms are you going to take away?”
Click here to get the FOX News app
Clarence Thomas shakes hands with Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Delaware), who was then chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, before his Senate confirmation hearing in the U.S. Senate Chambers in Washington, D.C., on September 10, 1991. (Ernie Sachs/CNP/Getty)
After the Court handed down its Dobbs decision, Biden publicly declared it part of a “deliberate effort to upset the balance of decades of law” and a “tragic error” by the Court.
He argued that for the first time in history, the Supreme Court had stripped away a constitutional right.
After Biden attacked Dobbs during a NATO event overseas, critics such as Rep. Kevin Hahn (R-Okla.) said it was “unthinkable” that the president would attack another branch of the U.S. government on the world stage.
Then-President Obama appeared similarly infuriated in 2010 after the Supreme Court sided with the conservative advocacy group Citizens United in a case that critics said had led to a flood of corporate political money.
“While respecting the principle of separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court overturned a century-old law that, in my view, opens the door for special interests, including foreign corporations, to pour unlimited funds into our elections,” President Obama said in his State of the Union address that year.
In a rare but muted example of criticism flowing from opposite directions, President Obama was seen expressing sentiment while Justice Samuel Alito was seen uttering, “That’s not true.”
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) told CNN at the time that Obama’s actions were “a little over the top.”
In 1974, during the Watergate scandal, President Nixon cited the landmark New York Times v. Sullivan decision, which established limitations on public officials’ ability to sue the press for libel.
In a White House speech, Nixon raised the “constitutional question” and argued that some lawyers were interpreting the case as a “license to lie” about politicians and their families.
“This is wrong and we need reform so that candidates running for public office know that if they are attacked with completely untrue facts, they may have the right to sue for defamation,” Nixon said, warning that the situation was deterring good people from running for public office.
Presidents Bush and Clinton, and outgoing Vice President Al Gore (Tim Clary/AFP via Getty Images)
Presidents other than Biden, Obama and Nixon have generally shown mercy while accepting the political defeats wrought by the Supreme Court’s decisions.
The most iconic example comes from former President Clinton, who, during a trip to North Aylesbury in England, appeared to gracefully accept the fact that Vice President Al Gore could not beat then-Texas Governor George W. Bush in the 2000 election.
Clinton said a nation divided by the “Hung Chads” and the so-called “Brooks Brothers riots” could be united by the respect shown by candidates in the wake of Bush v. Gore.
In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that Florida’s recount should be halted, overturning an earlier order from the Florida Supreme Court.
“[T]The essential unity of our nation was reflected in the words and values of the men and women who fought in this great struggle, and I am proud of both. [candidates]”,” Clinton said, pledging support during the Bush transition.
Gallup Poll Polls from December 2000 ultimately showed Clinton’s approval rating up six points.
The White House declined to comment on a general characterization.
Fox News’ Ryan Rugani contributed to this report..
