Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, and Rep. Chellie Pingree, D-1st District, criticized a U.S. Supreme Court ruling Monday that former President Donald Trump is entitled to immunity from prosecution for official acts taken during his presidency.
The 6-3 decision, prompted by charges that Trump tried to overturn the results of the 2020 election, sets a potentially dangerous precedent, they said.
“Today’s Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity is of serious concern and has potentially grave implications for unchecked presidential authority in the future,” King’s office said in a written statement on his behalf. “The idea of broad presidential authority as outlined by the court violates a bedrock principle of American law and practice – that no one, not even the president, is above the law.”
A spokesperson for Rep. Jared Golden, D-2nd District, said Golden is reviewing the ruling.
A spokesperson for Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said Collins was traveling around the state and did not have an opportunity to review the opinion Monday.
“This ruling, which essentially removes the check of potential criminal liability on any future chief executive, is especially troubling given the enormous power of the modern presidency,” King’s staff said. “Senator King and his team are taking a close look at both the majority ruling and minority dissent and will be evaluating whether Congressional action may be necessary to protect the public and the rule of law.”
Pingree said Monday’s ruling undermines the foundational principal of the Constitution that no one is above the law.
The court ruled that Trump is entitled to some level of immunity from prosecution for official acts after he was charged with three counts of conspiracy and one count of obstructing an official proceeding for trying to overturn his loss in the 2020 election. The case now returns to a lower court to determine if the actions Trump took were in an official or private capacity.
The 6-3 decision featured a dissent from the court’s liberal block arguing that the ruling reshapes the presidency with a dangerous expansion of powers by granting immunity for official actions. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote the dissent, while Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion.
“As Justice Sotomayor lays out in her powerful dissenting opinion, this decision will have severe long-term consequences and upsets the principles that have existed since our nation’s founding,” Pingree said in a written statement.
“Mr. Trump’s desperate attempt to cling to power fueled a violent insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021. The Supreme Court’s decision today not only opens the door to absolving this treasonous act but gives any future president seemingly unchecked freedom to commit crimes at will for political gain. It’s a sad day for America. It’s a sad day for democracy.”
Send questions/comments to the editors.
Modify your screen name
Join the Conversation
Please sign into your Press Herald account to participate in conversations below. If you do not have an account, you can register or subscribe. Questions? Please see our FAQs.