U.S. Sen. Reed deems No Kings Act ‘critical’ to safeguarding democracy in America

U.S. Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) looks over his talking points in support of the 'No Kings Act' inside his Cranston office on Aug. 2, 2024. (Christopher Shea/Rhode Island Current)

Like many Democrats, U.S. Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) was appalled when the Supreme Court last month ruled former President Donald Trump was immune from criminal prosecution for any action done in an “official” context.

“That’s just preposterous,” Reed said in an interview at his Cranston office Friday. “I think the court has done a tremendous disservice to both the Constitution and to the presidency.”

That’s why the Ocean State’s senior senator signed his name onto legislation that aims to negate that decision.

The “No Kings Act,” introduced Thursday by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), reaffirms that presidents and vice presidents do not have legal immunity from actions that violate federal criminal law. The bill, which has 32 other co-sponsors, including Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) also removes the court’s jurisdiction over presidential prosecutions and clarifies that Congress determines who is subject to federal criminal laws, not the Supreme Court.

“I think that’s critical,” Reed said. “No one is above the law — that is the essence of the original founding of this country.”

That feeling has been echoed by President Joe Biden, who span>earlier in the week called on Congress to ratify a constitutional amendment limiting presidential immunity. A resolution was filed in the U.S. House of Representatives, where it was referred to the chamber’s Committee on Judiciary. 

The House resolution has 70 co-sponsors, including U.S. Rep. Seth Magaziner (D-R.I.). Rhode Island’s freshman Rep. Gabe Amo has not co-sponsored the push to create a new amendment, but intends to sign on during the House’s pro forma session Aug. 6, said office spokesperson Guillermo Perez.

“The Supreme Court issued a dangerous decision in Trump v. United States that expanded presidential immunity for official acts,” Amo said in a statement Friday. “No one should be above the law.”

But adding a new amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires a two-thirds vote in both the House and the Senate, along with ratification from three-fourths of state legislatures — which is unlikely to happen in today’s polarized climate.

Still, Rhode Island’s congressional delegation sees taking legislative action as a way to provide oversight on what they view as a rogue Supreme Court majority.

“Congress has the power to undo the damage of this decision and to clean up the rest of the mess at the Roberts Court,” Whitehouse, a senior member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said in a statement Thursday.

Congress may have the power to check the Supreme Court on its decision, but such a reform faces long odds of surpassing the 60-vote threshold needed to avoid a filibuster. Even so, Reed said he believes his colleagues across the aisle could sign on if there’s enough pressure from their constituents.

“This is not just for their president, it’s for every president going forward,” he said.

Undoing the court’s immunity decision is just one reform Reed said needs to be undertaken. He also highlighted Whitehouse’s proposal to create an enforceable code of ethics for the nine justices. 

The nation’s highest court took up their own code of ethics last year after facing scrutiny over undisclosed trips and gifts from wealthy political donors to some justices such as Clarence Thomas.

“It’s outrageous,” Reed said. “It used to be that the court had tremendous respect — it’s been a profound change, and not a good one.”

Whitehouse’s legislation was approved in committee in June 2023, but has yet to make it to the floor. The state’s junior U.S. senator told reporters at Rhode Island T.F. Green International Airport Monday he was given “a solid commitment” by Schumer that the bill would be taken up in the near future.