Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf
Page Number: 5

Cite as:

 603 U. S. ____ (2024) 

5 

Syllabus 

Ibid.  Pp. 17–19.

(2) With the above principles in mind, the Court turns to the con-
duct alleged in the indictment.  Certain allegations—such as those in-
volving  Trump’s  discussions  with  the  Acting  Attorney  General—are 
readily categorized in light of the nature of the President’s official re-
lationship  to  the  office  held  by  that  individual.    Other  allegations—
such as those involving Trump’s interactions with the Vice President, 
state  officials,  and  certain  private  parties,  and  his  comments  to  the 
general public—present more difficult questions.  Pp. 19–30.

(i) The  indictment  alleges  that  as  part  of  their  conspiracy  to 
overturn  the  legitimate  results  of  the  2020  presidential  election, 
Trump and his co-conspirators attempted to leverage the Justice De-
partment’s power and authority to convince certain States to replace 
their  legitimate  electors  with  Trump’s  fraudulent  slates  of  electors. 
According  to  the  indictment,  Trump  met  with  the  Acting  Attorney
General and other senior Justice Department and White House offi-
cials to discuss investigating purported election fraud and sending a 
letter from the Department to those States regarding such fraud.  The 
indictment further alleges that after the Acting Attorney General re-
sisted Trump’s requests, Trump repeatedly threatened to replace him. 
The Government does not dispute that the indictment’s allegations
regarding  the  Justice  Department  involve  Trump’s  use  of  official 
power.  The allegations in fact plainly implicate Trump’s “conclusive 
and preclusive” authority.  The Executive Branch has “exclusive au-
thority and absolute discretion” to decide which crimes to investigate
and prosecute, including with respect to allegations of election crime. 
Nixon, 418 U. S., at 693.  And the President’s “management of the Ex-
ecutive Branch” requires him to have “unrestricted power to remove
the most important of his subordinates”—such as the Attorney Gen-
eral—“in their most important duties.”  Fitzgerald, 457 U. S., at 750. 
The  indictment’s  allegations  that  the  requested  investigations  were 
shams or proposed for an improper purpose do not divest the President 
of  exclusive  authority  over  the  investigative  and  prosecutorial  func-
tions of the Justice Department and its officials.  Because the Presi-
dent  cannot  be  prosecuted  for  conduct  within  his  exclusive  constitu-
tional authority, Trump is absolutely immune from prosecution for the 
alleged conduct involving his discussions with Justice Department of-
ficials.  Pp. 19–21.

(ii) The indictment next alleges that Trump and his co-conspira-
tors “attempted to enlist the Vice President to use his ceremonial role
at the January 6 certification proceeding to fraudulently alter the elec-
tion results.”  App. 187, Indictment ¶10(d).  In particular, the indict-
ment alleges several conversations in which Trump pressured the Vice 
President to reject States’ legitimate electoral votes or send them back