U.S. ultimate Court president John Roberts systematically transforms the office of president towards monarchy, issuing controversial rulings extending presidential power. Constitutionalist Peter Shane warns that Roberts sanctions "extreme exploitation" of power by Donald Trump. The most prominent example is the precedent judgement on the presidential immunity of last year.
Roberts is the main "inventor" of the solution giving the president immunity in criminal proceedings. The ultimate Court issued a precedent judgement last year, granting US Presidents "absolute immunity" in matters relating to the performance of the president's basic duties.
The judgement protects the Presidents from criminal charges in authoritative matters and grants them the alleged immunity in the case of another authoritative acts. It is Roberts who has the right to compose the justification of the judgement on behalf of the majority as the oldest elder justice or president of the SN.
Roberts limits Congress' power
Constitutionalist Shane points out that Roberts clearly limits Congress' power. According to the Constitution, legislature should not only control the President, but besides have authority over large areas of national executive power.
When the lower instance court retained the right of legislature to issue a summons under punishment to disclose Trump's financial information, Roberts sent the conviction back for reconsideration. He argued that without restrictions for parliamentary powers he would have "imperial" power over the presidential office.
President like a monarch
According to the "excess rhetoric" of the president of the SN, the office of the president is described in "almost monarchical categories". Shane stresses that "America witnesses the transformation of presidency into something close to dictatorship".
Against tradition, the opinions of the founding fathers and the constitution, Roberts thinks the president is executive authority on his own. It has the full power of an American national execution, while the erstwhile explanation portrayed presidential power as "involved in a strategy of control and balance".
Judgment of the presidential immunity
On July 1, 2024, six judges nominated by Republican presidents voted a controversial sentence. This group included 3 judges nominated by Trump, with the opposition of the 3 Democratic nominees.
The verdict states that Presidents are protected by "absolute" immunity in the performance of basic activities related to their office. "Dominant" immunity covers authoritative actions, but does not concern proceedings of an "unofficial" nature.
Absolute immunity besides means that courts cannot usage the President's authoritative activities as evidence. In a separate sentence, justice Sonia Sotomayor declared, "In any case, the usage of authoritative power is now a king standing above the law."
"Given the way Roberts has chosen to go so far, optimism now seems naive" - Concludes constitutionalist Shane. Sotomayor added, "With fear for our democracy, I object to judgment."
(PAP) Note: This article was edited with Artificial Intelligence.
