Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Trump lawyer John Sauer had a stunning exchange over whether presidential immunity covers the assassination of political rivals during Thursday’s Supreme Court hearing.
Sauer had previously argued that under certain circumstances, a president could order Seal Team Six to assassinate a political rival and not face prosecution, at an appeal hearing on former President Donald Trump’s claim of presidential immunity.
This topic came up again during the Supreme Court hearing:
SOTOMAYOR: Now I think. What? And then your, answer, below, I’m going to give you a chance to say if you stay by it, if the president decides that his rival is a corrupt person and he orders the military or order someone to assassinate him, is that within his official acts that for which he can get immunity?
Sauer: It would depend on the hypothetical. What we can see that could well be an official act.
SOTOMAYOR: He could. And why? Because he’s doing it for personal reasons. He’s not doing it. Like President Obama is alleged to have done it to protect the country from a terrorist. He’s doing it for personal gain. And isn’t that the nature of the allegations here, that he’s not doing them, doing these acts in furtherance of an official responsibility? He’s doing it for personal gain.
Sauer: I agree with that characterization of the indictment. And that confirms immunity, because the characterization is that there’s a series of official acts that were done for an honorable.
