More stories

  • in

    Trump Is Partly Shielded From Prosecution in Election Interference Case

    The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that former President Donald J. Trump is entitled to some level of immunity from prosecution, a decision that may effectively delay the trial of the case against him on charges of plotting to subvert the 2020 election.The vote was 6 to 3, dividing along partisan lines.Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the majority, said Mr. Trump had immunity for his official acts.“The president is not above the law,” the chief justice wrote. “But Congress may not criminalize the president’s conduct in carrying out the responsibilities of the executive branch under the Constitution. And the system of separated powers designed by the Framers has always demanded an energetic, independent executive. The president therefore may not be prosecuted for exercising his core constitutional powers, and he is entitled, at a minimum, to a presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts.”In dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the decision was gravely misguided.“Today’s decision to grant former presidents criminal immunity reshapes the institution of the presidency,” she wrote. “It makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of government, that no man is above the law.”The justices said there was a crucial distinction between official and private conduct and returned the case to the lower courts for additional analysis.The court’s ruling raises the possibility of further delay in the case against former President Donald J. Trump on charges of plotting to subvert the 2020 election.Tom Brenner for The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Biden debería poner fin a su candidatura

    Varias veces y de manera acertada, el presidente Joe Biden ha dicho que lo que está en juego en las elecciones presidenciales de noviembre es nada menos que el futuro de la democracia estadounidense.Donald Trump ha demostrado ser un peligro significativo para esa democracia, una figura errática e interesada que es indigna de la confianza pública. Ha atentado de manera sistemática contra la integridad de las elecciones. Sus partidarios han descrito públicamente una agenda para 2025 que le daría poder para llevar a cabo sus promesas y amenazas más extremas. Si vuelve a ocupar el cargo, ha prometido ser un presidente diferente, sin las restricciones que imponen los controles de poderes del sistema político de Estados Unidos.Biden ha dicho que es el candidato con más posibilidades de enfrentarse a esta amenaza de tiranía y vencerla. Su argumento se basa en gran medida en el hecho de que derrotó a Trump en 2020. Esa ya no es una justificación suficiente para que Biden sea el candidato demócrata este año.En el debate del jueves, el presidente necesitaba convencer a los estadounidenses de que está a la altura de las exigencias extraordinarias del cargo que busca ocupar por otro periodo. Sin embargo, no se puede esperar que los votantes ignoren lo que fue evidente: Biden no es el hombre que era hace cuatro años.El jueves por la noche, el presidente se presentó como la sombra de un gran servidor público. Batalló por explicar lo que lograría en un segundo mandato. Le costó responder a las provocaciones de Trump. Tuvo dificultad para responsabilizar a Trump por sus mentiras, fracasos y planes escalofriantes. Más de una vez le costó trabajo llegar al final de una frase.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Supreme Court Rules for Member of Jan 6. Mob in Obstruction Case

    The Supreme Court sided on Friday with a member of the mob that stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, saying that prosecutors had overstepped in using an obstruction law to charge him.The ruling may affect hundreds of other prosecutions of rioters, as well as part of the federal case against former President Donald J. Trump accusing him of plotting to subvert the 2020 election. But the precise impact of the court’s ruling on those other cases was not immediately clear.Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the majority, read the law narrowly, saying it applied only when the defendant’s actions impaired the integrity of physical evidence.Lower courts will now apply that strict standard, and it will presumably lead them to dismiss charges against many defendants.The vote was 6 to 3, but it featured unusual alliances. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, a liberal, voted with the majority. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a conservative, wrote the dissent.Most Jan. 6 defendants have not been charged under the law, which prosecutors have reserved for the most serious cases, and those who have been charged under it face other counts, as well. The defendant in the case before the justices, Joseph W. Fischer, for instance, faced six other charges.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Trump Hawks American Flag Pins with His Name in Gold Splashed Across Them

    Donald J. Trump’s campaign is billing it as a must-have fashion accessory for his supporters: an American flag lapel pin with the former president’s name scrawled in gold block letters across it — in all caps.The pins were available starting Thursday for a $50 donation to the Trump campaign, the latest merchandising gambit from a candidate who has hawked a plethora of products over the decades, most recently Bibles and Trump sneakers.A donation page for the pins declared that Mr. Trump’s political opponents had rendered him a convicted felon and asked supporters if he could count on their support.His latest marketing pitch is further testing the norms of flag etiquette and drawing fresh scrutiny from critics.It’s not only the flag flap surrounding Mr. Trump, whose birthday, June 14, happens to fall on Flag Day. Some election deniers have flown the flag upside-down, a historical symbol of distress, to protest Mr. Trump’s 2020 election defeat. An inverted flag appeared at the home of Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., a display that he attributed to his wife.Alterations to the flag are forbidden under the U.S. Flag Code, which was created in the 1920s by a group of patriotic and civic groups that included the American Legion and adopted as law by Congress in 1942.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Participant in Jan. 6 Riot Loses Primary Race in South Carolina

    A 22-year-old who participated in the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol lost his bid to unseat a Republican incumbent in the South Carolina House of Representatives.The defeat of Elias Irizarry in the state primary on Tuesday is the latest in a number of losses that riot participants have suffered at the ballot box in recent months. Most recently, Derrick Evans, a former West Virginia lawmaker who pleaded guilty to a felony for his role in the attack, was defeated in a Republican primary in May for a congressional seat there.Mr. Irizarry graduated last month from the Citadel, the esteemed public military college in Charleston, S.C. He was running in House District 43, a rural area in the northern part of the state. The incumbent, Randy Ligon, will not face a Democratic challenger in the general election, and will serve a fourth term in office.Mr. Irizarry was sentenced to 14 days in jail after pleading guilty to a trespassing charge related to his participation in the 2021 riot. He was suspended from the Citadel for a semester but was later reinstated after a federal judge, Tanya S. Chutkan, wrote a letter to the school stating that Mr. Irizarry had demonstrated “remorse and a determination to make amends.”Before his sentencing, Mr. Irizarry told Judge Chutkan that he was ashamed of his participation in the storming of the Capitol. But in the run-up to the election, his campaign website noted his prosecution for engaging in “nonviolent activities” at the Capitol as proof that he had “always stood for the conservative movement.”That reference to Jan. 6 disappeared from the website last week after The New York Times discussed it with Mr. Irizarry’s federal public defender. In a text message, Mr. Irizarry said he had initially mentioned his involvement in the riot on his website “for the sake of transparency.” More

  • in

    Steve Bannon Is Rallying MAGA World Before Prison Sentence

    The onetime adviser to former President Donald J. Trump has framed his impending imprisonment as an act of patriotism.Stephen K. Bannon was sitting in the back seat of an S.U.V. on a pleasant Friday evening in Powhatan, Va., enjoying what could be his last weeks of freedom.A day earlier, Mr. Bannon, the onetime adviser to former President Donald J. Trump, had been ordered by a federal judge to surrender by July 1 to begin serving a four-month prison term for disobeying a congressional subpoena.But there was never a question about whether he would show up as scheduled to headline a rally in rural Virginia for Representative Bob Good, the chairman of the hard-right House Freedom Caucus. This kind of thing — this kind of crowd — is what he lives for.“This is ‘War Room,’” Mr. Bannon said proudly as he watched rally goers carrying lawn chairs and blankets spreading out to hear him speak. He was referring to the influential podcast he streams from his Capitol Hill basement for four hours every weekday.He was going to need to find some guest hosts to keep it all going in his absence. But Mr. Bannon, who has long reveled in his infamy, insisted that his impending imprisonment would only make him stronger. He framed it as the ultimate act of patriotism by a MAGA warrior whom the government was bent on silencing in the months leading up to the presidential election.“There’s no downside,” Mr. Bannon said. “I served on a Navy destroyer in my 20s in the North Arabian Sea and Persian Gulf. I’m serving in prison in my 70s. Not a bad book end.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    ‘Sedition Panda,’ a Jan. 6 Rioter in a Costume Head, Is Convicted

    Jesse James Rumson, known as Sedition Panda for the costume head he wore, was found guilty of eight charges related to his participation in the breach of the U.S. Capitol.A Florida man who breached the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, while wearing a costume panda head was convicted on Friday of assaulting a police officer and other charges related to the events of that day.The man, Jesse James Rumson, 38, who became known as Sedition Panda, was found guilty of eight total charges, two felonies and six misdemeanors, after a bench trial in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.He was convicted by Judge Carl J. Nichols, who has garnered his own headlines for challenging the Justice Department’s use of a federal obstruction law to prosecute Jan. 6. rioters.In a separate case, Judge Nichols, a Trump appointee, dismissed a charge against another Jan. 6 defendant, Joseph Fischer, for violating a federal law that makes it a crime to corruptly obstruct an official proceeding.The judge dismissed the charge in that case on the grounds that the law strictly concerns white-collar crime, saying that it required a defendant to take “some action with respect to a document, record or other object.” An appeals court reversed the judge’s ruling, and Mr. Fischer successfully brought the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, which is expected to release a decision this summer.Prosecutors have invoked the obstruction law against hundreds of rioters, typically in the most serious cases. But prosecutors did not charge Mr. Rumson with violating that law, and Judge Nichols did not appear to have any reservations about the applicability of the charges prosecutors did bring.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More