supreme courts ruling on trumps immunity
The Supreme Court in Trump v. United States held that presidents receive broad immunity for certain official acts — absolute immunity for core presidential functions and at least presumptive immunity ...
Your fact-checks will appear here
The Supreme Court in Trump v. United States held that presidents receive broad immunity for certain official acts — absolute immunity for core presidential functions and at least presumptive immunity ...
The most credible allegation tied to Representative Jasmine Crockett’s “most publicized” lawsuit centers on an , but reporting is limited and inconsistent about any civil suit stemming from that incid...
The federal power to withhold or condition grants to states flows principally from the Spending Clause—Article I, Section 8—which gives Congress broad authority to spend for the “general Welfare” and ...
The Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. United States (July 1, 2024) holds that presidents receive broad immunity for some official acts—absolute immunity for “core” executive functions and presumpti...
The Supreme Court’s 2024–25 decision in Trump v. United States established a three-tiered immunity framework: absolute immunity for “core” or “exclusive” presidential powers, presumptive immunity for ...
Major episodes cited by critics as examples of Donald Trump “ignoring” court rulings center on aggressive enforcement choices and rapid executive actions that courts blocked or limited, most prominent...
The Supreme Court in Trump v. United States held that former presidents enjoy absolute criminal immunity for exercises of “core” presidential powers, presumptive immunity for other official acts, and ...
The Supreme Court treated the citizenship-question fight as a mixed legal outcome: it recognized the Secretary of Commerce’s statutory authority to ask about citizenship but blocked the specific 2020 ...
The Supreme Court held in Trump v. United States that former presidents enjoy at least presumptive immunity from federal criminal prosecution for "official acts" taken while in office and absolute imm...
The Supreme Court’s 2012 decision in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius upheld most of the Affordable Care Act by treating the individual mandate as a tax while simultaneously rul...
Two intertwined streams—administrative policy shifts (prioritization, moratoria, expansions of expedited removal and asylum restrictions) and high-stakes court rulings over those policies—drove much o...
The Supreme Court’s July 1, 2024 decision carved presidential acts into three immunity buckets — absolute for core constitutional functions, presumptive for acts within the “outer perimeter” of offici...
Two separate emergency Supreme Court orders determined when and to whom Donald Trump’s tax records could be released: the Court declined in February 2021 to halt turnover of Mazars-held records to Man...
No—there is no record in the reporting provided that the U.S. Supreme Court ordered Donald Trump to “pay” anything within 72 hours for tax fraud; the Supreme Court’s actions in the long-running disput...
The Supreme Court decided the pair of July 9, 2020 cases differently in emphasis: in Trump v. Vance the Court rejected a claim of absolute presidential immunity from a state criminal subpoena in a 7–2...
The Supreme Court heard expedited arguments on President Trump’s sweeping global tariffs on Nov. 5, 2025, after lower courts concluded he exceeded his authority under the International Emergency Econo...
The Supreme Court in Trump v. United States (July 1, 2024) held that a former President enjoys absolute criminal immunity for acts within his “exclusive” constitutional powers and presumptive immunity...
The Supreme Court’s June 27, 2019 decision in Rucho v. Common Cause held that federal courts cannot adjudicate claims of partisan gerrymandering because such claims present nonjusticiable political qu...
The U.S. Supreme Court in Trump v. United States (decided July 1, 2024) held that a president has absolute immunity for some “core” constitutional powers, presumptive immunity for other official acts,...
The Supreme Court’s 2019 decision in Rucho v. Common Cause declared that claims of partisan gerrymandering present nonjusticiable political questions, and shifting the principal battleground to state ...