In Donald Trump's immunity case, the Supreme Court ruled Monday that presidents are shielded from prosecution for official acts, but not unofficial ones.

What You Need To Know

  • The Supreme Court ruled Monday in Donald Trump's immunity case, saying that presidents are shielded from prosecution for official acts, but not unofficial ones

  • The case was sent back to a lower court, further delaying the historic prosecution against the Republican ex-president on charges that he sought to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election; the lower courts will determine if Trump's charges are based on unofficial acts

  • The ruling was 6-3 along the high court's ideological lines, with Trump's three appointed conservative justices ruling in favor, but the three liberal justices on the bench dissenting

  • In a blistering dissent, liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor, an appointee of Trump's predecessor Barack Obama, expressed grave concern for how this ruling could impact the future of American democracy

The case was sent back to a lower court, further delaying the historic prosecution against the Republican ex-president on charges that he sought to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, which culminated in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by a mob of his supporters.

Trump faces four felony counts in the Washington, D.C., case filed by special counsel Jack Smith, including conspiracy to defraud the United States, two charges related to obstructing an official proceedings and conspiracy against rights. Monday's ruling comes after the Supreme Court last week narrowed the federal obstruction statute faced by Trump and hundreds of other Jan. 6 defendants. 

Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges and has denied any wrongdoing. The high court's order sends the case to lower courts to determine if Trump can still face charges based on Monday's ruling.

The ruling was 6-3 along the high court's ideological lines, with Trump's three appointed conservative justices ruling in favor, but the three liberal justices on the bench dissenting. 

"Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority," the ruling, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, reads. "And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts."

The high court had previously held that presidents should be shielded from civil liability, but had never weighed in on criminal culpability until Monday.

In a blistering dissent, liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor, an appointee of Trump's predecessor Barack Obama, expressed grave concern for how this ruling could impact the future of American democracy, saying that it not only "reshapes the institution of the Presidency," but "makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that no man is above the law."

"Looking beyond the fate of this particular prosecution, the long-term consequences of today’s decision are stark," she wrote. "The Court effectively creates a law-free zone around the President, upsetting the status quo that has existed since the Founding. This new official-acts immunity now 'lies about like a loaded weapon' for any President that wishes to place his own interests, his own political survival, or his own financial gain, above the interests of the Nation."

"When he uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune. Let the President violate the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends. Because if he knew that he may one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be. That is the majority’s message today."

"Even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do, the damage has been done," Sotomayor wrote. "The relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law. 

"Never in the history of our Republic has a President had reason to believe that he would be immune from criminal prosecution if he used the trappings of his office to violate the criminal law," she later added. "Moving forward, however, all former Presidents will be cloaked in such immunity. If the occupant of that office misuses official power for personal gain, the criminal law that the rest of us must abide will not provide a backstop."

"With fear for our democracy, I dissent," Sotomayor concluded.

In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee in November's election, called it a "BIG WIN FOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND DEMOCRACY" in all-caps.

"PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!" he added.

A senior Biden campaign advisor said that the ruling "doesn’t change the facts" about what happened on Jan. 6, 2021: "Donald Trump snapped after he lost the 2020 election and encouraged a mob to overthrow the results of a free and fair election."

Trump is already running for president as a convicted felon for the very same reason he sat idly by while the mob violently attacked the Capitol: he thinks he’s above the law and is willing to do anything to gain and hold onto power for himself," the senior adviser said. “Since January 6, Trump has only grown more unhinged. He’s promising to be a dictator ‘on day one,’ calling for our Constitution to be ‘terminated’ so he can regain power, and promising a 'bloodbath' if he loses. The American people already rejected Donald Trump’s self-obsessed quest for power once – Joe Biden will make sure they reject it for good in November.”

At least one Democratic lawmaker, amid a sea of outrage from President Joe Biden's party, said that they will move to impeach justices on the high court.

"The Supreme Court has become consumed by a corruption crisis beyond its control," New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wrote on X, formerly Twitter. "Today’s ruling represents an assault on American democracy. It is up to Congress to defend our nation from this authoritarian capture. I intend on filing articles of impeachment upon our return."

Two of the high court's conservative justices -- aside from the three nominated to the bench directly by Trump -- faced Democratic calls for recusal: Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

Thomas’ wife, Ginni, attended the rally near the White House where Trump spoke on Jan. 6, 2021, though she did not go the Capitol when a mob of Trump supporters attacked it soon after. Following the 2020 election, she called the outcome a “heist” and exchanged messages with then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, urging him to stand firm with Trump as he falsely claimed that there was widespread election fraud.

Justice Samuel Alito said there was no reason for him to step aside from the cases following reports by The New York Times that said flags similar to those carried by the Jan. 6 rioters flew above his homes in Virginia and on the New Jersey shore. His wife, Martha-Ann Alito, was responsible for flying both the inverted American flag in January 2021 and the “Appeal to Heaven” banner in the summer of 2023, he said in letters to Democratic lawmakers responding to their recusal demands.

Spectrum News' Ryan Chatelain and The Associated Press contributed to this report.