Fact check: Can a former US President be prosecuted for crimes committed before or during their term in office?

1. Summary of the results

The question of whether a former US President can be prosecuted for crimes committed before or during their term in office is complex and has been addressed by various sources with different perspectives. According to ^[1], the Supreme Court has granted former President Trump presumptive immunity for official acts and absolute immunity for core constitutional powers, but he remains liable for unofficial conduct, indicating that a former president can be prosecuted for crimes that are not official acts ^[1]. Similarly, ^[2] outlines that a former president enjoys absolute immunity for core powers and at least presumptive immunity for other official acts, while having no immunity for unofficial acts, affirming that prosecution is permissible for private or unofficial conduct ^[2]. ^[3] also summarizes the decision, noting that the Court held former presidents are immune from prosecution for official actions but can be charged for private or unofficial conduct ^[3]. In contrast, some sources, such as ^[4], imply that the Supreme Court's decision sets a precedent that presidents are above the law, suggesting that a former US President may not be prosecutable for crimes committed during their term ^[4]. However, the majority of the analyses suggest that a former US President can be prosecuted for crimes committed before or during their term, as long as they are not official acts ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Some sources, such as ^[5] and ^[6], provide historical context and examples of past US Presidents who faced allegations of criminal conduct, but do not directly address the question of whether a former US President can be prosecuted for crimes committed before or during their term in office ^{[5] [6]}. Additionally, ^[7] and ^[8] provide context on the Trump administration's use of federal law enforcement and the laws and guidelines related to the protection of the President, but do not directly address the question ^{[7] [8]}. ^[9] suggests that prosecuting former heads of state is common in healthy democracies and that the US has the institutions and safeguards in place to handle such cases fairly and credibly, providing an alternative viewpoint ^[9]. It is also important to consider the potential implications of prosecuting a former US President, including the potential for political polarization and the impact on the country's democratic institutions. Furthermore, the analyses could benefit from a more in-depth examination of the legal and historical precedents surrounding presidential immunity and prosecution.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original statement may be misleading, as it implies that a former US President may not be prosecutable for crimes committed before or during their term in office. However, the majority of the analyses suggest that a former US President can be prosecuted for crimes committed before or during their term, as long as they are not official acts ^{[1] [2] [3]}. ^[4] may benefit the ACLU and other organizations advocating for accountability and transparency in government, as it implies that the Supreme Court's decision sets a precedent that presidents are above the law ^[4]. On the other hand, ^[1], ^[2], and ^[3] may benefit those who argue that former presidents should be held accountable for their actions, as they suggest that a former US President can be prosecuted for crimes committed before or during their term ^{[1] [2] [3]}. Ultimately, the potential for misinformation and bias in the original statement highlights the importance of carefully considering multiple sources and perspectives when evaluating complex legal and political issues ^{[5] [4] [6] [1] [2] [3] [7] [8] [9]}.