No former President has faced criminal prosecution for his acts while in office in the more than 200 years since the founding of our country.

The President therefore may not be prosecuted for exercising his core constitutional powers, and he is entitled, at a minimum, to a presumptive immunity

In this case, however, no court has thus far considered how to draw that distinction, in general or with respect to the conduct alleged in particular.

A federal grand jury indicted former President Donald J. Trump on four counts for conduct that occurred during his Presidency following the 2020 election.

To the extent that the majority’s new accountability paradigm allows Presidents to evade punishment for their criminal acts while in office

Here, I will highlight just two observations about the results that follow from this paradigm shift.

These foundational presuppositions are reflected in a procedural paradigm of rules and accountability that operates in the realm of criminal law

I write separately to explain, as succinctly as I can, the theoretical nuts and bolts of what, exactly, the majority has done today

Today’s decision to grant former Presidents immunity for their official acts is deeply wrong.

Ultimately, the majority pays lip service to the idea that “[t]he President, charged with enforcing federal criminal laws, is not above them,”