Your fact-checks will appear here
A court case that showed limits to presidential immunity where judicial process or pre-presidential conduct is involved.
The Supreme Court’s current doctrine holds that a president (including a former president) enjoys absolute criminal immunity for exercises of “core” or “conclusive and preclusive” presidential powers ...
and related privileges shape which lawsuits can proceed, which acts are insulated, and how courts balance separation-of-powers concerns against accountability; the law gives absolute civil immunity fo...
Legal scholars reading the Constitution treated the third article of impeachment not as a narrow criminal-count but as an assertion of the House’s political-remedial power to police abuses of office—i...
The Supreme Court’s civil-law precedents center on a binary: absolute immunity for official acts touching the “outer perimeter” of presidential duties, and no special immunity for unofficial or pre‑pr...
The constitutional and legal landscape leaves meaningful non‑criminal paths for holding a former president to account if prosecutors cannot bring or sustain criminal charges: civil litigation, impeach...