Sotomayor doubles down on opposition to presidential immunity decision

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor just made her first public remarks since Donald Trump became America's 47th president, and what she said has caught the attention of many of his supporters.

Sotomayor doubled down on her opposition to last summer's presidential immunity decision and expressed concern about just how much Americans trust the country's highest court.

Sotomayor was asked if public support for the Supreme Court is dwindling. If it is, Sotomayor thinks that putting Trump "above the law" might be one of the reasons why.

"If we as a court go so much further ahead of people, our legitimacy is going to be questioned," Sotomayor told an audience on Feb. 5. "I think the immunity case is one of those situations. I don’t think that Americans have accepted that anyone should be above the law in America. Our equality as people was the foundation of our society and of our Constitution."

She continued, "I think my court would probably gather more public support if it went a little more slowly in undoing precedent."

In a 6-3 vote during the summer of 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that former presidents should enjoy absolute criminal immunity with regard to certain core functions.

Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, added that "other official acts are entitled to a presumption of immunity."

The decision absolved Trump of many of the accusations that could have potentially resulted in time behind bars.

Sotomayor authored the dissent in the case. She was joined by fellow liberals Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

"Today’s decision to grant former Presidents criminal immunity reshapes the institution of the Presidency," Sotomayor wrote. "It makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that no man is above the law."

On Feb. 5, Sotomayor made her position clear once again.

"Our Constitution itself has provisions not exempting the president from criminal activity after an impeachment," she said. "So, I had a hard time with the immunity case. And if we continue going in directions that the public is going to find hard to understand, we’re placing the court at risk."