Smita Ghosh

If the Court wanted to resolve this case quickly, it could avoid for now resolving all the complex issues about the boundary of any presidential immunity. It could say we assume for purposes of this decision that immunity exists for official acts (though we don't decide that or whether it exists for only some official acts) -- contrary to the DC Circuit. Even so, most of the acts charged in the indictment involve private acts, as the President's lawyer conceded at argument. In addition to the acts already conceded to be private, the Court could also decide now whether any additional acts charged in the indictment similarly involve purely private acts. There is no immunity for any of those acts, even under the President's own theory. The trial could proceed based just on the acts considered personal. But it does not seem the Court is going to do that. It seems inclined to a broader opinion that grapples more generally with the novel questions of the scope of any possible immunity for former presidents from criminal prosecution.