Debating Immunity

No, I’m not talking about vaccines versus natural immunity. I’m referring to this morning’s Supreme Court arguments regarding presidential immunity.

Trump-haters, led by Special Council Jack Smith, are arguing that a president has no immunity at all. Trump’s lawyers are arguing that the president should have total immunity. My guess is that the high court will come down somewhere in between with an opinion issued in late June.

Then, it would likely send the case back to the lower court, instructing it to reconsider the case in view of the nuanced opinion the justices issued, making it even more unlikely that Smith’s case in Washington, D.C., could be settled before the election.

Ironically, the strongest argument being made today on Trump’s behalf is being made right now by Alvin Bragg in New York City and Fani Willis in Atlanta. Their abusive and selective prosecutions are exactly what constitutionalists are warning about.