The nation was captivated on Thursday as the Supreme Court grappled with the weighty issue of whether a former president can be held criminally accountable for their actions while in office. Meanwhile, in a less imposing courthouse in New York City, details of a former president’s love life were being laid bare in a case involving hush money payments to cover up extramarital affairs.
As Justice Neil Gorsuch solemnly declared that they were “writing a rule for the ages,” passers-by outside the Supreme Court shared their opinions on the case involving former President Donald Trump. The question at hand: Should a president have full immunity from prosecution?
While Trump’s lawyer argued in Washington that the former president should be shielded from federal charges related to the 2020 election, in New York, the former publisher of a supermarket tabloid testified about Trump’s efforts to suppress damaging stories of affairs with a porn star and a nude model.
The juxtaposition of the high-minded legal arguments in Washington and the salacious details in New York left many observers stunned. “You have this great, abstract, almost law school argument at the Supreme Court, and this pretty tawdry case where the rubber hits the road,” said one political science professor.
As the day unfolded, it became clear that the Supreme Court might send the case back to a lower court for further examination, potentially delaying a trial for Trump. The contrast between the two proceedings left many wondering whether a former president should truly be above the law. The events of the day served as a stark reminder of the complexities and contradictions of American democracy.
