.
.


With all the brilliant minds in the forum, perhaps someone will step forward and shed light on a question which I believe is at the heart of the case, Trump v. United States.




On February 28, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in Trump v. United States, No. 23-939. See: The Supreme Court Update - February 29, 2024


“This case concerns the criminal prosecution of former President Donald Trump in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into the events of January 6, 2021. Trump sought a stay of the D.C. Circuit Court’s decision affirming the district court’s rejection of Trump’s presidential immunity defenses.”

The question presented to the Supreme Court was limited to:


"WHETHER AND IF SO TO WHAT EXTENT DOES A FORMER PRESIDENT ENJOY PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY FROM CRIMINAL PROSECUTION FOR CONDUCT ALLEGED TO INVOLVE OFFICIAL ACTS DURING HIS TENURE IN OFFICE." SOURCE




On April, 25th, 2024, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments concerning the above question asked.


What seems to be unclear is why that question would be asked when in fact, our Constitution provides the answer under Article I; Section 3, Clause 7:




”Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.”(my emphasis)



Article I; Section 3, Clause 7, is part of the due process procedure agreed upon in our Constitution to deal with those holding a federal office of public trust, who are charged and convicted of violating that trust. The above mentioned Clause addresses the question asked and stipulates, one who is convicted by the Senate is to be removed from office and prohibited to ever hold another office of public trust and is then “. . . liable and subject to indictment, trial, Judgement and Punishment . . . “, within the boundaries of our ordinary judicial system.


So, why was our Supreme Court asked to answer the above mentioned question, considering former President Donald Trump has not been convicted by the Senate, and in fact has been acquitted, which makes the question absurd?


JWK





The whole aim of construction, as applied to a provision of the Constitution, is to discover the meaning, to ascertain and give effect to the intent of its framers and the people who adopted it._____HOME BLDG. & LOAN ASSOCIATION v. BLAISDELL, 290 U.S. 398 (1934)