![](http://redraiderrvparklubbock.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/us-supreme-court-building-2225766_1280.jpg)
The U.S. Supreme Court grants Trump partial immunity for his actions in a controversial decision that marks a victory for the former president.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that former President Donald Trump has partial immunity from prosecution for actions he took during his time in the White House.
The court granted him the right to “absolute immunity from criminal prosecution” for his official actions during his term in office.
However, it was ruled that Trump lacked immunity for unofficial actions.
The Supreme Court justices, with a conservative majority, issued the verdict with 6 votes in favour and 3 against.
A “victory” for Trump
“We conclude that under our constitutional structure of separation of powers, the nature of presidential power requires that a former president enjoy certain immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his term in office,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the document explaining the ruling.
He said, “At least with respect to the president’s exercise of his basic constitutional powers, this immunity must be absolute.”
He added, however, that “the president does not enjoy immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything he does is official . The president is not above the law.”
Trump hailed the decision as a ” great victory for our Constitution and democracy” in a post on his social media platform Truth Social.
Most analysts see the ruling as a victory for the Republicans.
But his lawyers are already using it as an argument to annul the former president’s conviction for a criminal case for falsifying documents to conceal a payment in exchange for silence to former porn star Stormy Daniels, according to U.S. media.
Trump’s lawyers reportedly sent a letter to the New York judge presiding over the trial, citing Monday’s Supreme Court ruling as their argument.
Those records were signed during his tenure in the White House in 2017, which his lawyers say should be considered.
Trump’s lawyers insist that the latest Supreme Court decision confirms the defence’s position in the New York case, stating that some of the prosecution’s evidence should not have been allowed because it constituted official presidential acts.
Sentencing on the 34-count conviction for falsifying business records was expected to be handed down on July 11.
However, the judge in charge of the case, Juan Merchan, postponed the sentence until September while Trump’s lawyers seek to challenge the convictions in light of the Supreme Court’s decision.