The Supreme Court has granted at least partial immunity to former President Donald Trump for the actions he took as president. Attorney Alan Dershowitz joins Glenn to explain what this means. He lays out why this is likely a big win for Trump that has made it all but impossible for his Jan. 6 case to go to trial before the 2024 election. But Dershowitz also explains why he believes this isn’t over yet – chances are, he argues, this case will be heading back to the Supreme Court …
Transcript
Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors
GLENN: Big news. And riots come out of France. This weekends. We haven't even had a chance to talk about that. But we will.
But in Paris right now, is Alan Dershowitz. He's getting ready to get up on stage. And speak.
But we wanted to take a couple of minutes. The decision on Trump immunity. Or actually it's presidential immunity came down.
And I think it's a win for the republic.
I think that's the way I would have ruled.
It was nine HP three. Alan, any just on it, and what it says?
ALAN: I'm in Paris. And speaking to you from the place of riots and demonstrations. And I'm not a part of that. Bit predicted exactly this instigation. (?) many any book, Trump.
Neither side would have a complete victory. And the Supreme Court would rule six-thee. And if at that if it's well-within the authority of the president. He has immunity.
If it's outside of the president. The question is, which is which?
Does TV to go back to the trial court? To determine whether the indictment had things that covered by immunity. (?) so this is the first step, in what what would be a multi-step process. It probably means, that there won't be a trial before the election.
GLENN: Right. So that's a win for Donald Trump.
ALAN: I think so.
GLENN: But is this a win for the republic? Because we can't have one of the branches going after the other branch, and then we also can't have people dragging the president into the -- into the courtroom, for everything that he does.
He's got to have immunity on official stuff, right?
ALAN: I agree. I agree.
GLENN: Do you agree with this line? Yeah. I agree with the line in general. I think it will be hard to implement and practice.
Everything the president does, he does as president. That's very hard to separate (?) than public acts. For example, the president orders the targeted assassination of Sella Manny.
Surely, he has to be (?) for any prosecution. But what if the president orders troops to have a coupe did he at a. And keep him in office. (?) hypothetically. He probably shouldn't get immunity for that.
So I do think, that this seems like the right line. And now, the problem is, it's going to be complemented by the lower courts.
And the lower courts, of the (?) District of Columbia. Are completely biased against Trump.
It may come back from the Supreme Court.
This may not be the last word from SCOTUS.
GLENN: Any just before we let you go? I know you have to get to the stage.
Any just at all, about what should be happening with the president on stepping down.
I don't know how you can say, he should step down from the campaign, and not as president.
What's the right thing to do?
ERIC: All I worry about is the alternative. Look, there's no question, that Biden, he himself admitted he's slowed down.
He's less -- less able than he was. The question is: What's the alternative. If he does step down, the Democrats may nominate some radical progressive person, who will be terrible to the country.
Terrible for peace in the Middle East.
We may see, you know, an attempt to get real radicals, as president and vice president.
So sometimes, the devil you know, is better than thively you don't.
And we'll see what the Democrats do. If they -- were to nominate some moderate person. That might be good. But if they use this as an excuse to let the progressive wing of the party take over, it won't be good.
GLENN: Alan Dershowitz, thank you very much. Stay safe.
ALAN: Always my pleasure. Thank you.
GLENN: You bet. Alan Dershowitz. That's an interesting thing coming from Alan Dershowitz, isn't it?
STU: Yeah. For sure.
The whole -- very interesting day here. And I think a very good one for Donald Trump.
This ruling going through it, I think exactly what he would want here. It doesn't give him, you know, full immunity on everything he did while he was in office.
It -- it -- and I think that would be bad for the country, right?
If he had this ability to have complete immunity, and any president to have complete immunity on anything they did. It would be completely ridiculous.
GLENN: But that's if we know that's what the impeachment process is for. First.
STU: Right. It also -- Trump's lawyers basically argued this. They even said, we wouldn't have the right to murder a bunch of people for fun.
GLENN: Right.
STU: Right? We're talking about official acts. Now, what the court is saying, is we have to have -- first of all, there's a presumptive immunity for a president, when dealing with these situations.
So you are going to start off with the idea. Okay. There is immunity. Because he was president.
Then there has to be some sort of (?) whether it's an official act or unofficial act.
They sent it back to the courts. (?) are these official acts or not. You rushed through this. (?) whether these were official acts or not.
There's some sort of process there.
Which, by the way, the court notes. We don't know what it is.
There's no actual official process to figure out, whether these are official acts or not.
So this is amaze of legal rulings and challenges.
And the bottom line to all of this, is basically, I could be wrong on this, Glenn.
I will admit if I am.
But to me, this basically kills the possibility of either of these January 6th cases, coming before this election.
Like, it goes from unlikely to impossible with this ruling.
GLENN: Well, if president -- here, let me make a prediction.
If the president loses -- President Trump loses this election.
It will -- these cases will just disappear.
If the president wins this election, they'll fight it tooth and nail.
And they'll drag him all the way through.
But, you know, I think people are tired of all of this stuff. Myself.
You know, the last part of the debate, when they were going back and forth. And Joe Biden was making fun of Donald Trump's weight.
I mean, was he really actually doing a fat joke there?
I mean, I couldn't believe it.
And finally, Trump did say. Let's stop being -- acting like children here.
I think people just -- you know, their lives are in enough turmoil.
They would like somebody to pay attention to them, please.
STU: It's -- look, yeah. I think that's right.
And this is an amazing day.
Stop for a second.
And go back a year. Right?
Six months. This is a possibility of four cases come you up against Donald Trump. That go up to 91 charges against him. And we had no idea where this was going. One them has gone through 34 convictions. We see the result of that. Has not moved the election at all. Everyone has seen that as a weakest one. It will be overtinder anyway.
It's nonsense in my view. That leaves I with the two January 6. Which on the (?) consequences of that. Regardless of what you're feeling. Those were the most impactful. If you were to get convicted (?) even though, I think he was -- obviously, the government was overreaching on all this stuff.
Well, both of those are dead before this election now.
GLENN: And -- and the fanny Bryce. Or whatever her name.
STU: Fani Willis. (?) I would much rather have fanny Bryce do it.
She is -- that thing is pretty much dead.
I mean, it's not.
STU: I think that's dead, especially with this ruling.
I mean, I think it's dead.
We will see. It could still wind through.
They could find their outs.
It was dead anyway.
Most likely, now. I think it's dead, dead, dead.
Then you have the documents case. Again, keeping documents to me, the lowest of consequences in this.
But still, he had trouble there. It looks like there's no question, that will be pushed past November as well.
So it -- we're kind of at the point where that whole, hey, this is going to be an election about legal charges against Donald Trump is over.
Whatever consequence has occurred.
We're going to see. This is it.
There's no more moving this election. On charges. By Democrats.
I mean, Trump had already won the back and forth on this. By getting it to the Supreme Court, and having it take it along.
Just, if they have it delayed. They had a horrible ruling. It would still be a ruling for Trump. Because of the way it played out. This is a much better option.
For him, it will wind around the courts forever.
There's no chance of this happening before November now.
GLENN: And it's the right thing to do as well. This is the right thing to do for the republic.