Supreme Court justices skeptical of sweeping immunity claims by Trump
Justices on the Supreme Court voiced skepticism Thursday to assertions from former President Trump’s attorneys that presidential immunity could extend to an attempted coup or the assassination of a political rival, even as they seemed ready to offer some protections from criminal prosecution. Such a ruling could create a new cycle of legal battles that has the impact of delaying Trump’s federal election subversion trial — and his others — past the election. Conservative and liberal justices alike peppered Trump’s counsel with hypothetical situations, asking how far the former president’s claim of sweeping immunity protections would go. Chief Justice John Roberts asked whether a president could be prosecuted for accepting a bride for appointing someone to an ambassador post, while liberal Justice Elena Kagan asked whether a president selling nuclear secrets would have immunity. Fellow liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked if “fundamentally evil” actions such as ordering the military to take out a political rival would be protected by presidential immunity. D. John Sauer, who argued the case on behalf of Trump, said most of the hypotheticals could plausibly fall under the …