Dershowitz: Presidential Immunity Is Necessary -- To a Degree

The judiciary is potentially making a constitutional mistake in rejecting all presidential immunity, but the Supreme Court could weigh in to protect that tenet of our democracy, according to law expert Alan Dershowitz on Newsmax.

Advertisement

"The court is dead wrong when it says that, essentially, nobody is above a criminal prosecution: Senators are; our senators and congressmen can't be prosecuted for things they said and did on the Senate or House floor," Dershowitz told Tuesday's "National Report" after a three-judge D.C. Circuit panel ruled former President Donald Trump's immunity ended when he left office.

"Even judges have some degree of immunity, so it shouldn't be surprising that presidents have some immunity. The question, as it is with senators and judges, is how much immunity — so it's a matter of degree."

Ed Morrissey

Eh, I don't think that's an argument that will convince even the conservatives on SCOTUS. Senators and Representatives are immune from legal action for things they *say* on the floor in debate, and are immune from arrest (mostly) while Congress is in session. But they are not immune from prosecution for criminal acts, as William "Dollar Bill" Jefferson can attest. He got indicted on corruption charges in 2007 and continued to serve in Congress until he lost his election the next year to Joseph Cao. He got convicted on corruption charges in 2009. 

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on HotAir Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement