Former federal prosecutor Chuck Rosenberg said Tuesday the Supreme Court’s Monday ruling in favor of former President Donald Trump “makes sense.”
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of former President Donald Trump’s claims of immunity for “official acts” in a case stemming from an indictment secured by special counsel Jack Smith over his efforts to contest the 2020 election in a 6-3 decision authored by Chief Justice John Roberts. Rosenberg said that the high court’s ruling, which President Joe Biden decried, was “logical,” preceding that assessment by saying that his views about the case would put him in a “rather lonely” position. (RELATED: John Kennedy Says Justice Department ‘Got It Good And Hard’ In SCOTUS Immunity Decision)
WATCH:
‘I Think It Is Logical’: MSNBC Legal Analyst Says SCOTUS Immunity Decision ‘Makes Sense’ pic.twitter.com/2ub90lHJEs
— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) July 2, 2024
“Once again, Willie, I find myself in the rather lonely middle. So, I think it is logical that some acts are immune,” Rosenberg told “Morning Joe” co-host Willie Geist. “The core constitutional responsibilities of any president, put Mr. Trump aside, ought to be immune from prosecution. Purely private acts ought not be immune. So the hard part, again, is in the middle, right? What is and what is not an official act?”
“Certain allegations—such as those involving Trump’s discussions with the Acting Attorney General—are readily categorized in light of the nature of the President’s official relationship to the office held by that individual,” Roberts wrote in the decision. “Other allegations—such as those involving Trump’s interactions with the Vice President, state officials, and certain private parties, and his comments to the general public present more difficult questions. ”
WASHINGTON, DC – JUNE 26: The Supreme Court is seen on June 26, 2024, in Washington, DC, where rulings were made in the cases of Murthy v. Missouri and Snyder v. United States. (Photo by Anna Rose Layden/Getty Images)
Rosenberg called out some of the more critical takes on the decision, those that claimed Biden could “take out” Trump and receive immunity. Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York vowed to introduce an impeachment resolution targeting the justices who backed immunity.
“I think we have to avoid the following construction: ‘You know, I don’t like Mr. Trump. This opinion is good for Mr. Trump. Therefore, we are on the brink of a constitutional apocalypse,’” Rosenberg told Geist. “I don’t believe that’s true. But part of Jack Smith’s case is now gone, and he’s going to have to fight for the rest. His road to prosecution is longer and bumpier and more narrow. All those things are true.”
ATLANTA, GEORGIA – AUGUST 24: In this handout provided by the Fulton County Sheriff’s Office, former U.S. President Donald Trump poses for his booking photo at the Fulton County Jail on August 24, 2023, in Atlanta, Georgia. (Photo by Fulton County Sheriff’s Office via Getty Images)
“I disagree with certain particulars in the case, but in the main, Willie, it makes sense to me that there is immunity in some cases and no immunity in others,” Rosenberg said. “To your point, we have to figure out the rest.”
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
