Nine key exchanges from the Supreme Court hearing about Trumps immunity claim

The nine Supreme Court justices spent almost three hours Thursday parsing oral arguments in former President Donald Trump’s case demanding absolute immunity from charges related to his actions after the 2020 presidential election.Their decision in the case could alter the fundamental understanding of a president’s constitutional powers for generations to come, stakes that were not lost on the justices.Here are nine key exchanges during oral arguments in Trump v.United States.Michael Dreeben, Justice Department counselor to the special counsel: “It’s common ground that all former presidents [knew] that they could be indicted and convicted.

And Watergate cemented that understanding.The Watergate smoking gun tape involved President Nixon and H.R.

Haldeman talking about and then deciding to use the CIA to give a bogus story to the FBI to shut down a criminal investigation.”Justice Samuel Alito: “Mr.Sauer and others have identified events in the past where presidents have engaged in conduct that might have been charged as a federal crime.

And you say, ‘Well, no, that’s not really true.’ This is page 42 of your brief.So what about President Franklin D.

Roosevelt’s decision to intern Japanese Americans during World War II? Couldn’t that have been charged under 18 USC 241 conspiracy against civil rights?Dreeben: “Today? Yes, given this court’s decision in Trump versus United States.”Trump lawyer John Sauer:“Could President George W.Bush have been sent to prison for obstructing an official proceeding or allegedly lying to Congress to induce war in Iraq? Could President Obama be charged with murder for killing US citizens abroad by drone strike? Could President Biden someday be charged with unlawfully inducing immigrants to enter the country illegally for his border policies?”Much later during the oral arguments, Justice Bret Kavanaugh:“How about President Obama’s drone strikes?”Dreeben:“The Office of Legal Counsel looked at this v...