Steny H. Hoyer
07/01/2024 | Press release | Distributed by Public on 07/01/2024 15:30
Hoyer Statement on Supreme Court Decision on Presidential Immunity
WASHINGTON, DC - Congressman Steny H. Hoyer (MD-05) released the following statement today on the Supreme Court's decision on Trump v. United States:
"Our Founding Fathers fought - and in some cases died in - a war of independence that was in part a denial of the premise that the King was the law, was above the law, or was not accountable for the breaking of the law. The Supreme Court's ruling today undermines that basic proposition of our democracy. It is, in that sense, a radical decision, and one that enables dangerous authoritarianism. It is an opinion that no matter how dangerous or heinous a president's actions may be in executing his 'official duties,' he cannot be held accountable for them. That is absolutely not what our country and our democracy are about.
"The Framers would shudder at the idea that inciting an insurrection could ever be considered an official presidential action. What we saw on January 6th were the actions of a demagogue subverting the Constitution, not a president trying to act within it.
"Not only is the opinion itself inconsistent with our nation's principles, but the Court's delay in making that decision clearly serves the former president's interests. The delay deprives the American people of a timely decision in the criminal case that asserts the former president broke the law on January 6th - a judgement that is critically important to the people choosing the next president."
"Our Founding Fathers fought - and in some cases died in - a war of independence that was in part a denial of the premise that the King was the law, was above the law, or was not accountable for the breaking of the law. The Supreme Court's ruling today undermines that basic proposition of our democracy. It is, in that sense, a radical decision, and one that enables dangerous authoritarianism. It is an opinion that no matter how dangerous or heinous a president's actions may be in executing his 'official duties,' he cannot be held accountable for them. That is absolutely not what our country and our democracy are about.
"The Framers would shudder at the idea that inciting an insurrection could ever be considered an official presidential action. What we saw on January 6th were the actions of a demagogue subverting the Constitution, not a president trying to act within it.
"Not only is the opinion itself inconsistent with our nation's principles, but the Court's delay in making that decision clearly serves the former president's interests. The delay deprives the American people of a timely decision in the criminal case that asserts the former president broke the law on January 6th - a judgement that is critically important to the people choosing the next president."