U.S. Prosecutors Challenge Trump’s Legal Shield: Assert Former Presidents Can Face Charges

In a significant legal development, U.S. prosecutors have vehemently opposed former President Donald Trump’s assertion that he is immune to criminal charges for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election defeat. Special Counsel Jack Smith, leading the prosecution, argued that neither the U.S. Constitution nor the nation’s legal traditions support the concept of granting former presidents “absolute immunity” from criminal charges related to actions during their tenure.

Smith, in a court filing, emphasized that establishing such a legal shield would effectively place presidents beyond the reach of the law, a stance he deems untenable. Contrary to Trump’s claim that the presidency provides “absolute immunity,” Smith affirmed, “He is wrong.”

The court document underscores the prosecutor’s perspective that constitutional principles and established legal norms reject the idea of shielding former presidents from criminal charges. Smith emphasized that this separation of powers, inherent in the constitution, allows for charging a former president for actions committed while in office, particularly if those actions involve illegal attempts to cling to power despite an electoral loss.