Support
← All Cases Coverage by Bryan K. Randolph · BrynoDC

Trump v. United States

No. 23-939 SCOTUS · Decided SCOTUS
Argued: Apr 25, 2024 Decided: Jul 1, 2024
The Law · How the Case Works

Overview

Overview

Former presidents have absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for core constitutional acts, ordering military strikes, pardoning defendants, vetoing legislation, and presumptive immunity for all else done in official capacity. In the January 6 prosecution, the Court ruled 6-3 that Trump can sometimes be charged, but built a framework requiring courts to identify official acts before any evidence involving them can be used at trial. The decision didn't end the prosecution; it sent it back to lower courts with a much narrower runway.

The Conclusion

Conclusion

The Supreme Court held 6-3 that former presidents have absolute immunity for core constitutional acts and presumptive immunity for other official acts. In Trump's January 6 prosecution, while the Court permitted charging him in some circumstances, it imposed a restrictive framework requiring courts to identify official acts before related evidence could be admitted at trial.

The Record · 1 original document
COURT Slip Opinion (PDF) PDF
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
FiledFeb 28, 2024
CL Statusterminated
View on CourtListener →

No circuit court data for this case.

Cert Granted -
Statusterminated
Filed (CL)Feb 28, 2024
View on CourtListener →
Don't miss the next one
Subscribe on Substack ↗ Watch on YouTube ↗

Docket

CourtListener ↗
SCOTUS TMR-81ae78cf Jul 28, 2026

Related Cases (4)

direct precedent
  • Nixon v. United States
    The opinion cites Nixon v. Fitzgerald to support the principle that presidents are entitled to broad immunities from legal liability for actions taken within the scope of their official responsibilities.
  • Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization
    The active case cites Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization as relevant authority.
  • United States v. Nixon
    The active case cites United States v. Nixon as relevant authority.
  • Marbury v. Madison
    The active case cites Marbury v. Madison as relevant authority.
Subscribe on Substack ↗

This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support