Reacting to the Supreme Court’s decision on presidential immunity, Rep. Joe Morelle (D-NY) announced his intention to propose a constitutional amendment to reverse the ruling. The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, ruled that former presidents have immunity for official acts but not for unofficial actions.
Chief Justice John Roberts, delivering the majority opinion, stated, “Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power requires that a former President have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure in office.” Roberts emphasized the necessity of this immunity to maintain the separation of powers.
The decision came as the Supreme Court reviewed Trump’s presidential immunity claim in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s January 6 case. The ruling sends the case back to the lower court for further consideration, instructing Judge Tanya Chutkan to properly analyze the conduct alleged in the indictment.
In a statement on social media, Morelle criticized the ruling and announced his legislative response. “I will introduce a constitutional amendment to reverse SCOTUS’ harmful decision and ensure that no president is above the law. This amendment will do what SCOTUS failed to do—prioritize our democracy,” Morelle wrote.
Morelle’s proposed amendment seeks to address concerns that the Supreme Court’s decision could allow presidents to evade accountability for their actions. By ensuring that no president, current or former, is above the law, the amendment aims to reinforce the principle of equal justice under the law.
The Supreme Court’s decision has stirred considerable debate regarding the balance of power and the accountability of presidential actions. Morelle’s move to introduce a constitutional amendment reflects the ongoing contention surrounding this issue. As the amendment process unfolds, it will likely provoke further discussion on the boundaries of presidential immunity and the mechanisms for holding presidents accountable for their actions.