‘Blatant Election Interference’: Gregg Jarrett Roasts Jack Smith’s ‘Irrelevant’ Filing As ‘Bad Detective Fiction’
'This was done knowing full well media and Democrats would seize on provocative details'
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-New York) announced Thursday his plan to introduce new legislation that would undercut the Supreme Court's recent immunity ruling.
The act, if passed, would make clear that Congress has the authority to decide "to whom federal criminal laws may be applied," instead of the Supreme Court, according to the proposed legislation, NBC News reported.
In response to a motion filed by Donald Trump's legal counsel, the Supreme Court ruled last month that the former president is entitled to "absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority." He also has "at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts," the high court found.
As a result of the Supreme Court's ruling, a federal case against Trump that alleged he unlawfully maintained classified documents after his presidency — one of the four cases lodged against Trump — was recently dismissed by United States District Judge Eileen Cannon, who determined that special counsel Jack Smith's "appointment and funding" were "unlawful."
The judge's decision to toss the case sparked outrage from Trump's Democratic opponents.
In the days following the ruling, Schumer wrote on X, "We were all taught in grade school that there are no kings here in America. But what the MAGA Justices have done is effectively place a crown on Trump's head."
He announced lawmakers were working on a bill to classify Trump's actions listed in the cases as "unofficial acts." As part of the Supreme Court's ruling, it determined that current and former presidents are not entitled to immunity for unofficial acts; however, it did not define what constitutes an official or unofficial act.
On Thursday, one month after the high court's decision, Schumer stated that he plans to propose the No Kings Act to undo the "disastrous immunity ruling" by the "MAGA Supreme Court."
"The Founders were explicit: no man in America shall be a king. But the MAGA Supreme Court threw out centuries of precedent and anointed Trump and subsequent presidents as kings above the law. That's why I'm introducing the No Kings Act to crack down on this dangerous precedent," Schumer wrote in a post on X.
In a separate social media post, he stated, "This bill would reaffirm that the President is not immune to legal accountability and remove the Supreme Court's jurisdiction to hear appeals related to presidential immunity."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
President Biden might need to take a break from the podium.
After the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity, the president gave a speech slamming the court’s ruling — which granted former president Donald Trump absolute immunity for presidential actions and presumptive immunity for “official actions.”
Biden claimed in his speech that the ruling allows Trump to do anything, including going after political opponents with the law.
“What I’ve been hearing, Glenn, over the past 24 hours, my understanding is the Supreme Court gave a James Bond license to kill to the president of the United States,” Stu Burguiere jokes to Glenn Beck.
And he’s not wrong — as that is what Biden alluded to.
“This nation was founded on the principle there are no kings in America. Each, each of us is equal before the law. No one is above the law,” Biden said, stumbling through his words. “Today's decision almost certainly means that there are virtually no limits to what a president can do.”
“It’s a dangerous precedent, because the power of the office will no longer be constrained by the law,” the president continued.
Glenn can’t believe what he’s hearing and points out the blatant hypocrisy.
“What they’re saying is he’s going to silence speech. Donald Trump will silence any dissent. And that’s not happening now,” Glenn says sarcastically.
“Let’s say you’re running against a guy who Donald Trump didn’t think he could beat, then he would just make up some charges and then get the guy arrested and then keep him, you know, in the court system, until you finally got him into jail. That’s what Trump could do,” he adds.
Biden was being a hypocrite regarding not only the attempted jailing of Trump but also the jailing of those who participated in the protests on January 6.
“If we’re really going to go all the way, what should be terrifying is that Donald Trump could just round up a whole group of people because he didn’t like them, you know what I mean?” Glenn says.
However, as the Supreme Court ruled, the president’s actions must be constitutional.
“If the president acts in an unconstitutional way, then you can get him. But unless it’s unconstitutional, he can’t do it. So it would be unconstitutional to round up the people that disagreed with you. It would be unconstitutional to silence those who oppose you. It would be unconstitutional to go after your opposing political foe and try to put them in jail,” Glenn continues.
“All things that Joe Biden is currently doing.”
To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.