There is a possibility they may see some opportunity for some immunity for some president ial decisions. If they decide it that way, it may have to go back down to the District Court which could cause further delay. I appreciate you not being sidetracked by somebody who apparently wants to scream louder than anybody else. Catherine, the lower courts have been unanimous that trump cannot claim immunity. Does that tell you something . I cant imagine theyre going to say a former president has absolute immunity for criminal acts. What will be a win for donald trump is if theyre saying were sending it back to judge chutkan to determine which, if any he would have immunity for and which he would not. Thats a win because that would delay the trial, which is already delayed. So what of course obviously jack smith and Special Counsel is hoping for, a majority of the court will just say, no, absolute immunity from Criminal Prosecution for a former president and clearly jack smith would say this
Check abuses of power especially the use of official power for private gain. Here the Executive Branch is enforcing congressional statutes and seeking accountability for petitioners alleged misuse of official power to subvert democracy. That is a compelling public interest. In response, petitioner raises concerns about potential abuses. But established legal safeguards provide layers of protections with the Article Iii Courts providing the ultimate check. The existing system is a carefully balanced framework. It protects the president but not at the high constitutional cost of blanket criminal immunity. That has been the understanding of every president from the framing through watergate and up to today. This court should preserve it. I welcome the courts questions. Does the president have immunity or are you saying there is no immunity even for official acts . Yes, justice thomas. But i think it is important to put in perspective the position that we are offering the court today. The
presidential immunity. in a monumental decision for presidential powers, the court ruled that former president trump is immune from prosecution over official acts. they specified he does not have immunity for unofficial acts. the decision has massive implications for presidential powers in the criminal cases against donald trump. hello, everyone. this is outnumbered. i m kayleigh mcenany here is my cohost, emily compagno. also joining us, kennedy saves the world podcast host, kennedy, rebeccah heinrichs, and former assistant u.s. attorney, andy mccarthy. but we begin at the supreme court where fox news sunday houston fox news chief legal correspondent shannon bream is standing by with details on the historic ruling. shannon? kayleigh, you heard it this morning. it breaks down this way. the court says that there is absolute and presumptive immunity for president for the official or core acts of his presidency. they say that does not extend to criminal activity part of
g good evening. i m bret baier. breaking tonight fox news has new and exclusive reaction from president biden on the guilty verdict in former president trump s historic criminal trial. the first of a former current president in u.s. history. we have been talking about that and the fallout of it. now a little q&a. white house correspondent peter doocy joins us live from the north lawn with that. good evening, peter. peter: good evening, bret. it took 24 hours but we finally got president biden to tell us what he thinks the trump convictions mean for him ahead of november s elections this is iphone video as we took as he got done toasting the kansas city chiefs on the north lawn and you will only see it here. peter: do you think this conviction helps trump in the election? are you worried that this could happen to you some day, somebody comes up with some charges and tries to bring you into court after your term? [inaudible] and when trump says you are just trying to br
system and unprecedented ways. after temporarily freezing a gag order against them, judge tanya chutkan just reinstated, ruling that the order should stay in effect while his lawyers pursue an appeal. while you may ask, even in the very short window when it was on hold donald trump continue to attack people involved in the case. he took to truth social to stand with prosecutors called a threatening message about his former chief of staff, mark meadows. i met so that judge chutkan wrote in her decision with quote almost certainty would violate the order. to be clear, the gag order isn t prohibiting trump from talking about the case, the judge is simply saying that he can t lash out against witnesses and prosecutors. it doesn t sound that unreasonable to me. but trump can t seem to help himself, case in point, minutes after the gag order was reinstated trump attacked another likely witness in the case. his former attorney general, bill barr, trump called him among any other thi