By T. Jayani, JadeTimes News
The Supreme Court is set to deliver its final opinions of the term on Monday morning, addressing whether former President Donald Trump can claim immunity from federal election subversion charges. Exceeding their informal end of June deadline by just one day, the nine justices will convene for the last time before their summer break, likely sparking legal debates over their final decisions.
The most significant remaining case is whether Trump is entitled to the broad immunity he seeks from special counsel Jack Smith’s election subversion charges. Trump argues that without immunity, presidents would be hindered in office, constantly fearing post presidency prosecution. This argument seemed to gain some traction with the 6-3 conservative Supreme Court during oral arguments in April.
The decision could have far reaching consequences for both Trump and future presidents. During a recent CNN debate, Trump claimed President Joe Biden “could be a convicted felon with all of the things that he’s done.” This response came to a question from CNN’s Jake Tapper about whether Trump would seek retribution against his political opponents. Trump initially stated his “retribution is going to be success” but then launched into accusations against Biden.
The case likely hinges on whether Trump’s post election actions were “official” duties or “private,” the latter of which would not likely be immune. Additionally, the court will rule on two cases involving the First Amendment and social media. These cases concern laws in Florida and Texas designed to prevent social media giants like Facebook and X from suppressing conservative views. The laws prohibit online platforms from removing or demoting posts expressing opinions, such as political content.
Republican governors who signed these laws argue they are necessary to prevent discrimination against conservatives by social media platforms. The relevance of the underlying dispute has somewhat diminished since Elon Musk bought X and changed its content moderation policies, reducing conservative accusations of viewpoint suppression. Nevertheless, the cases raise significant First Amendment issues that could have broad implications.
Central to both disputes is whether the curation of posts by social media platforms constitutes protected speech similar to how news outlets are protected in designing their front pages or guest lineups or if these platforms are merely carrying third party posts to readers, thus allowing for closer government regulation.
Another case to be decided involves a North Dakota truck stop challenging fees banks can charge for debit card transactions, potentially impacting other government regulations. The issue is whether the truck stop can sue given a six year statute of limitations on challenging government regulations.
Although technical, this question has significant potential ramifications. The federal government warns that siding with the truck stop could lead to a surge in challenges to government rules. These decisions will conclude a term where the high court largely avoided the core issues in two major abortion cases. It sided with the Biden administration on one gun regulation and invalidated a federal ban on bump stocks in another. On Friday, the court limited a charge against hundreds of participants in the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol.
Off the bench, the term was marred by controversies, including reports of controversial flags flying at properties owned by Justice Samuel Alito. An activist posing as a religious conservative at a Supreme Court event released secret recordings of Alito and his wife, as well as Chief Justice John Roberts, discussing politically sensitive topics.
In a significant breach of protocol, the court inadvertently posted a draft of its opinion in a major abortion case a day before the formal release. In that case, the court dismissed a dispute between Idaho and the Biden administration over the state’s strict abortion ban, temporarily blocking the ban’s enforcement in emergency health situations while underlying litigation continues.