By Miriam Raftery

May 3, 2024 (Washington D.C.) -- In April arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court,  former President Donald Trump’s lawyers argues that presidents should be immune from prosecution for any official acts done while they are in office,  unless the president is impeached and convicted by Congress.  But Trump attorney David Sauer’s argument, if accepted by the high court, would grant a president dictatorial powers even for violent acts committed for personal gain—by his own admission in arguments before the high court.

Liberal justices pushed back on that disturbing proposition.  Justice Elena Kagan pressed Sauer on whether ordering a military coup or selling nuclear secrets to a foreign power would be considered official acts that would prevent criminal prosecution of a president, and Sauer said such acts should be protected by presidential immunity.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor grilled Sauer on whether ordering execution of a political rival would be considered an official act. Sauer replied, “We could well see that as an official act.” Hear recording of this exchange.