In a landmark decision, the United States Supreme Court has clarified the scope of immunity for former presidents. The ruling, issued by a 6-3 majority, holds that ex-presidents enjoy broad immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts performed while in office.

Former presidents are shielded from criminal charges related to actions taken in their official capacity. This immunity, however, does not extend to unofficial or personal acts.

The case centered around former President Donald Trump, who sought absolute immunity from prosecution. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, emphasized that such absolute immunity lacks constitutional support.

The Court remanded the case to lower courts to determine whether Trump’s specific actions constituted “official acts.” This means that any potential trial will likely occur after the 2024 election.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented, expressing concern about the implications of granting criminal immunity to former presidents. She highlighted the need to balance accountability with the institution of the Presidency.

Legal experts anticipate that this ruling will shape future investigations and potential prosecutions involving ex-presidents. It underscores the delicate balance between accountability and the unique role of the presidency.