The left’s hysterical reaction to SCOTUS immunity decision is a half-baked overreaction | Opinion

For decade after decade in the United States of America, July 4, 1776, has been joyously celebrated as the date when American colonists declared their independence from the tyrannical monarchy of England’s King George III.

Now, July 1, 2024, is suddenly a date being mourned by hysterical liberals. Some are even claiming that the U.S. Supreme Court has placed our nation under a new form of monarchy, an all-powerful presidency.

How? By giving current, former, and future presidents a degree of qualified immunity from prosecution for the official actions they take. Many of the liberals also appear to be incensed because they believe the court’s ruling gave former President Donald Trump a get-out-of-jail-free card.

Hogwash!

Chief Justice John Roberts’ carefully crafted decision, speaking for the court’s 6-3 conservative majority, unequivocally declared that nobody, not even a president, is above the law.

However, the court ruled presidents must have leeway to do their job. They may use the executive authority granted to them by the U.S. Constitution to take official actions without having to fear that their political foes will haul them into court in some hostile judicial venue whenever they disagree with the president’s actions.

The majority opinion made it clear that if presidents abuse their authority or engage in illegal acts that are not within the scope of their official authority, they are not immune from prosecution.

With regard to such an abuse of power, it should also be noted that the Constitution provides a remedy — impeachment — when presidents overstep their authority. Indeed, two presidents within the past 30 years — Bill Clinton and Trump — were impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives, though not subsequently convicted and removed from office by the U.S. Senate.

The existence of these checks and balances did not prevent leftist critics from attacking the court’s majority opinion, nor did it deter ultraliberal Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor from writing a 29-page dissent that she read aloud, including the absurd assertion that “The President is now a king above the law.”

“Today’s decision to grant former Presidents criminal immunity reshapes the institution of the Presidency. It makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that no man is above the law,” Sotomayor declared.

“When he uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune.”

Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who’s from Miami, joined the dissenters: “The majority of my colleagues seem to have put their trust in our Court’s ability to prevent Presidents from becoming Kings through case-by-case application of the indeterminate standards of their new Presidential accountability paradigm.”

Unfortunately, like a dish prematurely removed from an oven, the dissenters’ opinions are half-baked. Much more remains to be decided, especially the essential task of deciding how to determine which presidential acts are deemed “official” and which are not.

In remanding the case back to the lower courts for review under the parameters suggested by the Supreme Court’s majority opinion, the court undoubtedly realized that reaching the finish line won’t occur prior to the 2024 presidential election.

Even so, liberals’ allegations that the court was deliberately causing a delay as a favor for Donald Trump are political blather. So was Monday’s blatant attack on the Supreme Court by President Biden, a man who has repeatedly exceeded his executive authority by trying to cancel billions of dollars in student loan debts.

While it was good to see the seemingly cognitively impaired president wide awake and able to read a script that someone had prepared for him, it was sad to see him trying once more to undermine the credibility of the nation’s highest court.

Robert F. Sanchez, of Tallahassee, is a former member of the Miami Herald Editorial Board. He writes for the Herald’s conservative opinion newsletter, Right to the Point. It’s weekly, and it’s free. To subscribe, go to miamiherald.com/righttothepoint.