Moody, other Florida Republicans react to SCOTUS ruling on Trump immunity
Anita Padilla contributed to this article.
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. – Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody and other Florida Republicans reacted to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision Monday to entitle former President Donald Trump to presumptive immunity from criminal prosecution.
“Presidential immunity is an important doctrine grounded in our Constitution,” Moody said. “As we argued, the Court must weigh the interest served by judicial action against the danger of intrusion on the presidency. We are pleased with today’s decision.”
The ruling means former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution, extending the delay in the Washington criminal case against Donald Trump on charges that he plotted to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
Among those reacting to Monday’s news is Florida Congressman Byron Donalds of District 19 who said on his “X” account, “In today’s precedent-setting, 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court did right by President Trump, they did right by the American people, and they did right by the hallowed institution of the Presidency of the United States. Jack Smith’s indictment is a disgrace to our legal system and it’s time that our nation turns the page on this egregious lawfare because President Trump did nothing wrong.”
Florida Congressman Daniel Webster of District 11 posted, “This ruling pushes back against leftist prosecutors and the weaponization of the DOJ against President Trump.”
U.S. Rep. John Rutherford of Jacksonville said on social media, “Today’s Supreme Court decision is a win for our Constitution, the rule of law, the American people, & President Trump. I commend SCOTUS for protecting our democracy and upholding presidential immunity. This “lawfare” being waged by the Left is dangerous & must end.”
According to the Supreme Court’s Monday determination, under the constitutional structure of separated powers, “the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority.”
The court stated Trump is “entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts.” However, the court said there is “no immunity for unofficial acts.”
In part, the court stated the following:
This case is the first criminal prosecution in our Nation’s history of a former President for actions taken during his Presidency. Determining whether and under what circumstances such a prosecution may proceed requires careful assessment of the scope of Presidential power under the Constitution. The nature of that power requires that a former President have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure in office. At least with respect to the President’s exercise of his core constitutional powers, this immunity must be absolute. As for his remaining official actions, he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity.
The court stated that criminally prosecuting a president for official conduct “undoubtedly poses a far greater threat of intrusion” on the authority and functions of the executive branch than “simply seeking evidence in his possession.”
U.S. Rep. Kat Cammack whose District 3 covers parts the counties of Alachua, Baker, Bradford, Suwanee and Union said in a social media post , “The Supreme Court immunity ruling has dealt another blow to the politically motivated Left that continues to weaponize our judicial system against President Trump. Hopefully this helps to move our election out of the courts and back into the hands of the voters.”
