The conversation, which revolved around the Supreme Court's decision that Trump has "absolute immunity" for his "official acts," sparked a debate on the extent of presidential immunity.
According to Mediaite, the Supreme Court's ruling, which came in a 6-3 vote, was seen as a partial victory for Trump. The former president has consistently claimed immunity from prosecution for any actions taken during his tenure. The ruling has raised concerns among some, including MSNBC's Katy Tur, who highlighted a dissenting opinion from Justice Sonia Sotomayor. Sotomayor argued that the court's decision could potentially place the next President above the law, akin to a "king."
Tur further suggested that Trump could be immune from prosecution even if he ordered the assassination of a political rival. This idea was based on an argument made by Trump's legal team during the case. When Tur asked legal analyst Neal Katyal, a former solicitor general, if this was the implication of the majority opinion, he responded, "Yes, that is what she’s saying the majority is saying, and that is how Trump will take it."
WATCH: MAJOR DONORS ASKING FOR BIDEN TO STEP ASIDE
Katyal further suggested that the ruling could allow the next administration to label any action as an "official act" and potentially evade legal repercussions. However, Rosenberg refuted this theory, clarifying that the court's ruling only grants a president immunity for actions that are part of their "core constitutional responsibilities."
WATCH RACHEL MADDOW SUPREME COURT’S ‘DEATH SQUAD RULING’
July 02, 2024
Rosenberg stated, "I’m still reading through, Katy, but I don’t see anything that says the assassination of a political rival is part of a president’s core constitutional responsibilities, for which he or she would be absolutely immune." He acknowledged that the ruling does present "some dangers," but dismissed the idea that it could sanction potential assassinations under the law.
SENATOR WARREN SLAMS SUPREME COURT’S 'EXTREMIST MAJORITY' – WHAT'S HER NEXT MOVE?
Rosenberg emphasized that issues related to the extent of presidential immunity would need to be argued in court on a "case by case factual basis." He concluded, "There is a lot more immunity here than I would have imagined and it sets up some dangers, but I don’t see anything here that sanctions, for instance, the assassination of a political rival."
This discussion underscores the ongoing debate about the boundaries of presidential power and immunity, a topic that has gained prominence during Trump's presidency and continues to be a subject of contention.
