On Monday, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) ruled that Donald Trump is immune from prosecution for acts he committed within his constitutional powers as president.

The ruling applies to anyone who holds the position of US president. However, a president can be prosecuted for acts committed in a personal capacity.

What does the Supreme Court’s Trump immunity verdict say?

Six Supreme Court justices – all appointed by Republican presidents – of nine agreed that if the president takes any action within the powers granted to him through the constitution, he cannot be prosecuted.

The US Constitution grants the president powers, including the ability to issue pardons, veto or sign bills, nominate high officials including cabinet members and Supreme Court justices, and direct the military after a congressional declaration of war on a foreign nation.

The verdict additionally grants presidents presumptive immunity “from criminal prosecution for a President’s acts within the outer perimeter of his official responsibility”, meaning a president is presumed to enjoy immunity from prosecution if his action pertains even just a small amount to his official status.

Furthermore, the court ruled that if a president is prosecuted for an act carried out in a personal capacity, the prosecution cannot refer to the president’s official actions in evidence.

Who dissented in the Trump immunity case?

Three justices – Sonia Sotomayor, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Elena Kagan – disagreed with the SCOTUS opinion, issuing a 29-page dissent.

Led by Sotomayor... (content truncated)