Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf
Page Number: 70

Cite as:  603 U. S. ____ (2024) 

3 

SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting 

delayed in taking any step to rein in the chaos he had un-
leashed.  Instead,  in  a  last  desperate  ploy  to  hold  onto
power, he allegedly “attempted to exploit the violence and 
chaos at the Capitol” by pressuring lawmakers to delay the 
certification of the election and ultimately declare him the 
winner.  Id.,  at  233,  ¶119.  That  is  the  backdrop  against 
which this case comes to the Court. 

II 
The Court now confronts a question it has never had to
answer in the Nation’s history: Whether a former President 
enjoys  immunity  from  federal  criminal  prosecution.    The 
majority  thinks  he  should,  and  so  it  invents  an  atextual,
ahistorical, and unjustifiable immunity that puts the Pres-
ident above the law. 

The  majority  makes  three  moves  that,  in  effect,  com-
pletely  insulate  Presidents  from  criminal  liability.    First, 
the majority creates absolute immunity for the President’s 
exercise  of  “core  constitutional  powers.”    Ante,  at  6.  This 
holding is unnecessary on the facts of the indictment, and 
the majority’s attempt to apply it to the facts expands the 
concept of core powers beyond any recognizable bounds.  In 
any event, it is quickly eclipsed by the second move, which 
is  to  create  expansive  immunity  for  all  “official  act[s].” 
Ante, at 14.  Whether described as presumptive or absolute,
under the majority’s rule, a President’s use of any official 
power for any purpose, even the most corrupt, is immune 
from prosecution.  That is just as bad as it sounds, and it is 
baseless.  Finally, the majority declares that evidence con-
cerning acts for which the President is immune can play no
role in any criminal prosecution against him.  See ante, at 
30–32.  That holding, which will prevent the Government 
from using a President’s official acts to prove knowledge or 
intent in prosecuting private offenses, is nonsensical.

Argument by argument, the majority invents immunity