MSNBC Legal Analyst Shuts Down Claim Trump Can ‘Assassinate’ Rivals Thanks to Immunity Ruling
MSNBC contributor Chuck Rosenberg pumped the brakes on Monday on a suggestion that the Supreme Court’s ruling in former President Donald Trump’s immunity case means he can “assassinate” a political rival with impunity.
Rosenberg, a former U.S. Attorney and FBI official, joined MSNBC’s Katy Tur for a panel discussion reacting to the Supreme Court ruling that Trump has “absolute immunity” for what they described as “official acts.” Trump has long maintained he’s immune from any prosecution for any acts taken while he was in office.
In a 6-3 vote, the Supreme Court handed Trump at least a partial victory. On Monday, Tur raised alarms about a dissenting opinion from Justice Sonia Sotomayor in which she argued the court had made the next president a “king above the law.” She even suggested Trump could be immune from prosecution if he ordered SEAL Team Six to assassinate a political rival, based on an argument put forth by Trump’s lawyers arguing the case.
“Neal, she’s arguing that he can assassinate someone now. Is that what this majority opinion is saying?” Tur asked legal analyst Neal Katyal, a lawyer and former solicitor general.
“Yes, that is what she’s saying the majority is saying, and that is how Trump will take it. And if you ever thought about the stakes in November and what they are, this opinion makes them very, very clear. The law is not going to be a check against the next president,” he said.
Katyal argued the next administration could “slap the label official act” on anything they do and likely get away with it.
Rosenberg shut down the theory, saying the court only said a president is immune from actions taken that are part of their “core constitutional responsibilities.”
“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. The problem is that much of this is indeterminate,” he said.
Issues would need to be argued in court on a “case by case factual basis,” Rosenberg said, but he acknowledged the ruling sets up “some dangers,” but not potential assassinations being sanctioned under the law.
“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,” he said.
Watch above via MSNBC.