In response to the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on so-called presidential immunity, New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has suggested that the conservative justices who expanded the powers of the chief executive should be impeached.
On Monday, the Court issued its majority opinion, in which Chief Justice John Roberts, joined by the remaining five conservative bloc justices, established precedent protecting presidents and former presidents from criminal charges for actions they may have taken while in office. The new standard requires the judicial branch to presume presidents have immunity for acts that fall within their office’s authority — in short, if they exercise a constitutionally granted power, they cannot be charged with a crime later on, even if their actions are criminal in nature or violate a federal statute in some way.
“The system of separated powers designed by the Framers has always demanded an energetic, independent Executive,” Roberts wrote in trying to justify the ruling.
Legal experts condemned the ruling as giving too much power to the executive branch with little oversight. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, a member of the liberal bloc of the Court, blasted the ruling as dangerous for the future of the country.
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.
“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,” the dissenting justice added.
On the social media platform X, Rep. Ocasio-Cortez similarly criticized the Supreme Court’s decision, writing that the Court has “become consumed by a corruption crisis beyond its control.”
“Today’s ruling represents an assault on American democracy. It is up to Congress to defend our nation from this authoritarian capture,” Ocasio-Cortez stated. “I intend on filing articles of impeachment upon our return.”
It’s unclear whether Ocasio-Cortez intends to impeach all six conservative justices or just a select few.
The House of Representatives is currently on recess through the Independence Day holiday. House members will return to work on Monday.
Ocasio-Cortez’s proposal faces steep, if not impossible, odds of passing, due to the House being controlled by Republicans. Consideration for her measure will likely be denied, as Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) has already made statements celebrating the ruling and downplaying concerns about the expansive new powers and protections that presidents now receive.
Even if Johnson somehow allowed for impeachment hearings to begin, Ocasio-Cortez would need to convince all Democrats in her conference, plus at least four Republicans, to back the measure, presuming everyone votes within the legislative chamber. Then the measure would have to pass with a two-thirds vote in the Senate, which is also nearly evenly split, with Democrats having only a slight majority in the chamber.
Only one justice of the Supreme Court, Samuel Chase in the early 19th century, has ever been impeached. In that case, Chase was impeached within the House but avoided indictment in the Senate and was allowed to serve out the remainder of his life as a sitting justice of the Court.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.