In this imaginary case, the President of the United States was driving a vehicle to an official function while in office. He was legally intoxicated. He crossed the center line of the road and hit a 16- year- old driver head on and killed her. The 16- year -old was not at fault. The President’s lawyer argues the case should be dismissed because a President is immune (can’t be prosecuted) for a crime committed while in office because he was involved in official act (driving to an official function). The prosecution argues that driving intoxicated is not an “official act” even though he was going to an official function and should be held accountable for DUI Manslaughter. The former President argues he should be immune because it will have a “chilling effect” on future Presidents who might fear criminal prosecution for decisions they make while in office.
FACTS
The President argues he cannot be prosecuted for DUI Manslaughter because his decision to drive while intoxicated was an “official act” to attend a function for the national security of the United States.
The Prosecution argues it was not an “official act” to drive after he had 5 drinks in one hour and was 2 times over the legal limit to drive.
JURY INSTRUCTIONS YOU MUST FOLLOW IN REACHING YOUR DECISION
Based on the recent United States Supreme Court Decision of Trump v. United States, No. 23-939, 7-1-24:
- An action by the President is not unofficial merely because it allegedly violates a generally applicable law.
- The motivation of the President in the claimed “official act” of driving while intoxicated is not relevant to your decision.
QUESTION:
Is the President of the United States immune from prosecution for DUI manslaughter?
Yes
No
CLICK HERE TO VISIT THE ORIGINAL POST ON GLORIABLOG.COM AND CAST YOUR VOTE.
