Jack Smith Slams Trump’s Immunity Claim As A Threat To Democracy

In a filing to the Supreme Court, Special Counsel Jack Smith argued that a stay should be denied and that Trump’s immunity claim is a threat to democracy.

Smith wrote:
The conduct alleged in the Indictment, if proved at trial, represents a concerted effort to violate the Constitution’s Term-in-Office Clause, see U.S. Const. Art. II, § 1, Cl. 1 (elected President “shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years”), and the President’s duty to “take Care that
the Laws be faithfully executed,” id., § 3.

The proposition that a former President is immune from federal criminal liability for conduct that would overturn his electoral defeat contravenes bedrock constitutional principles and threatens democracy itself.

Applicant never acknowledges the constitutional cost of insulating a former President from criminal accountability for that conduct.

To get more stories like this, subscribe to our newsletter The Daily.

Trump’s claim if the Supreme Court ruled in favor of it would mean that any incumbent president who lost an election could decide not to leave with no consequences. If a president wanted to rig an election, under Trump’s claim of immunity, they could do so with no consequences.

Giving a former president unlimited immunity would destroy the safety net that protects American democracy.

Trump’s immunity claim is a danger to the principles that the nation was founded on.

A Special Message From PoliticusUSA

If you are in a position to donate purely to help us keep the doors open on PoliticusUSA during what is a critical election year, please do so here. 

We have been honored to be able to put your interests first for 14 years as we only answer to our readers and we will not compromise on that fundamental, core PoliticusUSA value.

Copyright PoliticusUSA LLC 2008-2023