Push Notification

The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that presidents, including Donald Trump, have immunity from prosecution for “official” acts taken while in office will require U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutken, overseeing Special Counsel Jack Smith’s prosecution of the ex-president’s January 6 case, to determine which actions were official acts, and which were private.

That could provide the Special Counsel with the opportunity to hold “a trial before the trial,” even if the trial will not be able to take place before the election.

North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum (R) is going on defense for Donald Trump as he auditions for a possible vice presidential running mate.

Washington Post columnist Philip Bump wrote about Burgum's recent appearance on "Meet the Press," where he delivered some alarming answers to host Kristen Welker's questions.

The U.S. Supreme Court's anxiously awaited ruling on former President Donald Trump's absolute immunity claim came down on Monday morning, July 1 — with six GOP-appointed justices ruling that Trump enjoys immunity from prosecution for official acts as president and three Democrat-appointed justices dissenting.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor was especially vehement in her dissent, warning that the Republican justices were giving U.S. presidents way too much power.

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor's voice was "dripping with disdain" Monday as she read her dissent against Chief Justice John Roberts' decision granting immunity to former President Donald Trump for "official acts," legal analyst Joan Biskupic told CNN's Kaitlan Collins on Monday.

Biskupic was in the Supreme Court when the justices issued the landmark decision making a federal trial for the former president all but impossible before the election and granting the executive unprecedented new powers, legal experts say.

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) argued that special counsel Jack Smith could move forward with prosecuting former President Donald Trump despite a Supreme Court ruling granting him partial immunity.

After the high court ruled in a partisan vote Monday that Trump was entitled to some immunity, Swalwell insisted that Smith's prosecution of the former president for election interference would continue.

The U.S. Supreme Court Monday handed down its anxiously awaited decision on former President Donald Trump's claim that he enjoys absolute immunity from prosecution in special counsel Jack Smith's federal election interference case.

The 6-3 decision came down along party lines, with the dissent from Democrat-appointed justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Sotomayor was especially scathing in her dissent, arguing that the ruling gives presidents way too much authority.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruling that former President Donald Trump has limited immunity in his election interference case has liberals urging President Joe Biden to take advantage of additional powers under now-protected "official acts."

"Seriously, Pres. Biden needs to take this little 'immunity for official acts' protection out for a little spin," said writer Charlotte Clymer.

Experts say the Supreme Court struck a shattering blow to the delicate scales that balance political powers in Washington D.C. Monday — before they even released the ruling on presidential immunity.

Moments before the court issued its historic verdict ruling on former President Donald Trump's defense in his federal criminal trials, the nine justices revealed their ruling on a truck stop convenience store's challenge to debit card fees.

Former President Donald Trump's legal situation got a big boost with today's Supreme Court ruling that lower courts will have to exclude from prosecution any official acts that may have been part of his scheme to overturn the 2020 presidential election — but his political situation may have taken a hit, argued CNN commentator and former presidential adviser Van Jones.

That's because the Supreme Court's one-sided decisions will galvanize Democratic voters to rally, as they haven't been doing up to this point, to prevent Trump from taking office and regaining the power the far-right justices say he can have, Jones said on CNN.

The U.S. Supreme Court has opened the floodgates to legal challenges to years-old regulations in a new ruling, according to a justice.

The court decided 6-3 that North Dakota truck stop Corner Post could sue the Federal Reserve over a 2011 rule on credit card swipe fees, and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson warned in her dissent the decision would result in “a tsunami of lawsuits” with “the potential to devastate the functioning of the Federal Government," reported Politico.