American presidents aren’t kings. So, what’s the deal with the “No Kings Act” proposed in Congress Thursday?
“The very basis of our democracy is the idea that no man is above the law. But on July 1, 2024, the Supreme Court took the unprecedented step to overturn this most simple premise of our constitutional order,” said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.). That step was the court’s ruling that former President Donald Trump is able to claim immunity from criminal prosecution for some actions taken while in the White House.
In the historic 6-3 ruling, the justices established this for the first time. However, the court said that presidents would not have immunity for things not considered official acts. They ordered lower courts to determine how to apply this ruling to various legal issues Trump is facing.
“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,” wrote Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor in her dissenting opinion.
Audacy has also covered reports that Trump is indeed planning an “imperial” presidency. Trump, the GOP presidential candidate, has made comments about being a “dictator” and recently received criticism when he told Christians they wouldn’t have to vote anymore if he wins the 2024 election.
According to a press release from Senate Democrats, the “No Kings Act” would, if passed, “reaffirm that Presidents and Vice Presidents do not have immunity for actions that violate federal criminal law and clarify that Congress, not the Supreme Court, determines to whom federal criminal laws may be applied.”
Senate Democrats said that the legislation would remove the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction for all actions challenging the constitutionality of this legislation. Presidents or vice presidents seeking to challenge the constitutionality of the act would be able to do so in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The act would also establish additional jurisdictional and procedural guardrails.
“Given the dangerous and consequential implications of the Court’s ruling, legislation would be the fastest and most efficient method to correcting the grave precedent the Trump ruling presented,” said Schumer. “With this glaring and partisan overreach, Congress has an obligation – and a constitutional authority – to act as a check and balance to the judicial branch.”
Schumer and 33 other Democratic senators are supporting the bill. They aren’t the only Democrats taking action following the conservative-leaning Supreme Court’s ruling.
In late July, Audacy reported that President Joe Biden officially announced a plan to overhaul the court in an op-ed published in the Washington Post. He said the highest court in the land is currently “mired in a crisis of ethics,” and he suggested term limits and a binding code of conduct.
Trump, on the other hand, praised the decision. In a Truth Social post, he said: “the Supreme Court gave the Deranged One a high level SPANKING!” referring to special counsel Jack Smith, who brought charges of conspiring to defraud the United States, conspiring to disenfranchise voters, and conspiring and attempting to obstruct an official proceeding against Trump one year ago.