Supreme Court Concludes Term with Landmark Decisions on Presidential Immunity and Social Media Regulation

In an eventful conclusion to a notable Supreme Court term on July 1, 2024, the courtroom was packed as justices delivered their final opinions. Michael Dreeben of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office was notably present, anticipating a ruling in Trump v. United States, a case scrutinizing whether a former president is immune from criminal prosecution. Chief Justice John Roberts ultimately concluded that while presidential immunity is upheld for actions taken within the official scope, unofficial conduct does not warrant protection (see the full story here).

The day began with Justice Amy Coney Barrett expressing the opinion in Corner Post v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, where the court ruled that the lawsuit from a North Dakota convenience store was not barred by statutory limitations. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s dissent underscored potential risks posed by the majority’s decision, advocating that it could destabilize longstanding regulatory decisions.

Justice Elena Kagan then addressed the consolidated cases of Moody v. NetChoice and Netchoice v. Paxton, dealing with state regulations on social media companies. The court provided limited First Amendment guidance but remanded the cases for further judicial analysis, hinting Texas’ law might not stand constitutional scrutiny.

The highlight of the day, however, was Chief Justice Roberts’ opinion in Trump v. United States. He balanced a nuanced stance on executive immunity by asserting that although no president is above the law, certain official acts enjoy presumptive immunity from prosecution. Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s fiery dissent criticized the decision for inflating presidential immunity beyond constitutional intentions, arguing it weakens the rule of law.

After a slip of the tongue that briefly lightened the courtroom atmosphere, Roberts expressed gratitude toward the Supreme Court’s support staff. This closing tradition highlighted the dedication of retiring employees, recognizing their contributions to the institution.

The session ended with Marshal Gail Curley’s gavel signaling the end of another consequential court term.