Larson Calls for Constitutional Amendment to Limit Presidential Immunity

As calls for reform of the US Supreme Court increase, Rep. John Larson, D-1st District, has announced his support for a constitutional amendment to limit the impact of a recent Supreme Court decision expanding presidential immunity.

Larson, along with over 40 members of Congress, co-sponsored a constitutional amendment that would undo key parts of United States of America v. Donald Trump, the case in which the Supreme Court ruled that presidents have absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for acts carried out under the “conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority,” and presumptive immunity for official acts performed as president. Critics decried the ruling as essentially placing the president above the law.

“Earlier this month, the Supreme Court voted to erode a core principle of American democracy by placing presidents in a ‘law-free zone,’ shielding them from prosecution in many cases,” said Larson in a statement. “On January 6th, Americans saw how perilously close our democracy came to being overturned after insurrectionists, incited by the former president, tried to violently stop the peaceful transfer of power. Armed with immunity for ‘official acts,’ how far will a future president be willing to go? This decision must be overturned. I am proud to cosponsor a constitutional amendment to reverse their misguided ruling placing the Presidency of the United States of America above the law.”

The constitutional amendment states that “No officer of the United States, including the President and the Vice President, or a Senator or Representative in Congress, shall be immune from criminal prosecution for any violation of otherwise valid Federal law, nor for any violation of State law unless the alleged criminal act was authorized by valid Federal law, on the sole ground that their alleged criminal act was within the conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority of their office or related to their official duties…” The amendment also prohibits the President from pardoning him or herself. 

Passing such an amendment is seen as a high bar to clear. Constitutional amendments require both chambers of Congress to pass the amendment by at least a two thirds margin, and then the amendment would need to be ratified by at least three fourths of the state’s legislatures, which means 38 states. The Constitution has been amended 27 times since it was ratified, with the most recent amendment coming in 1992.

The recent rulings, including the court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade in 2022, combined with several controversies involving justices receiving free trips and other benefits from political actors, has placed pressure on politicians to make proposals to reform the Supreme Court. President Biden previewed an attempt at court reform in his speech where he announced his decision to not run for re-election. Biden is expected to reveal his full proposal later this week, which includes a code of ethics and term limits.

Americans support at least some reforms to the court. In a recent poll conducted by YouGov, a majority of Americans support both term limits for Supreme Court justices and a code of ethics for the Supreme Court. Support for expanding the number of justices falls along partisan lines, with 59% of Democrats supporting court expansion while 70% of Republicans oppose such a step. The YouGov poll reached 1,140 US adults and has a margin of error of +/- 3.7%.