This author completely agrees with you on this. The other thing is Thomas asked about the standing of the special counsel, they could punt it on that basis…Sure looks like this goes generally in Trump's favor:
All 9 agree that POTUS has some degree of immunity from prosecution (all 9 expressed concern regarding unintended consequences of precedent to the contrary)
The split is in the matter of degree.
The liberal 3 will likely say that POTUS immunity only extends to "core functions" of official acts (whatever that means).
The most conservative 4 might say that POTUS criminal immunity follows extent of Fitzgerald civil immunity.
The middle 2 (Roberts, ACB) are likely to try to split the baby somewhere in-between.
The end result will be a ruling in Trump's favor (6-3? 5-4?), with a remand to the District court to parse the allegations between official and private acts - allowing prosecution only on what remains of those private acts.
The sticky issue will be who defines the test for whether an act falls under immunity as an official act or falls outside immunity as a private act. Will SCOTUS define such a test in their decision, or will they also push that back onto the District court, knowing that whatever that court decides will almost inevitably end up back in front of SCOTUS, anyway?
Supreme Court Hears Immunity Arguments, Administrative State Smiling - SCOTUS Likely to Send Case Back to Lower Court - The Last Refuge
The issue of presidential immunity is being tested in the DC political Lawfare case against President Donald Trump. As the Jack Smith prosecution claims President Trump tried to “overturn the results of the 2020 election,” the issue of presidential actions intended to secure & protect the...
theconservativetreehouse.com