Recent Supreme Court ruling granting immunity to former and current presidents from criminal prosecution for official acts in office faces criticism from Congressional Democrats.
Representative Joseph Morelle from New York introduced a constitutional amendment aiming to overturn the court’s decision in the case of Trump v. United States.
Morelle stated, “Presidents are not monarchs or tyrants and should not be immune from prosecution.”
In a 6-3 vote, the court ruled that a president has immunity from prosecution while exercising presidential powers, with Trump’s appointees siding with conservative justices in the majority.
Trump has utilized this ruling to fight other criminal cases, leading to the dismissal of a case in Florida and an appeal against his conviction in Manhattan.
Morelle criticized the court’s decision, emphasizing the principle that all Americans are equal under the law.
The proposed amendment aims to remove immunity from prosecution based on official actions and prevent self-pardoning by a president.
The amendment is currently with the House Judiciary Committee, supported by 49 House Democrats, requiring a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate for approval, along with ratification by state legislatures.
Maryland Representative Jamie Raskin, a co-sponsor of the amendment, condemned the court’s ruling as a betrayal of constitutional law.
A similar measure is set to be introduced in the Senate, with a draft amendment emphasizing accountability and liability for actions of federal officials.