CNN Panelist Torpedoes NYT Journo’s ‘Absurd’ Claim That Immunity Ruling Could Make Presidents Kings

National Review editor-in-chief Rich Lowry on Saturday pushed back on New York Times journalist Lulu Garcia-Navarro’s claim that the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling could elevate presidents to monarchs. 

The Supreme Court ruled on July 1 that presidents possess immunity from criminal prosecution for “official acts” taken in office. Garcia-Navarro, on “The Chris Wallace Show,” said the ruling is “so open” that “you could interpret it that the president is now a king,” but Lowry said America’s core institutions still function the same way.

WATCH:

“How’s the president a king? There are no more elections in America?” Lowry asked, adding that having elections indicates presidents are not kings.

“Well, of course there are elections, but … if there is nothing that says that he can act in any way that he wants and there is no way that he can be held accountable,” Garcia-Navarro said before Lowry cut her off.

In a dissent to the immunity ruling, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the majority’s ruling “reshapes the institution of the Presidency,” claiming “the President is now a king above the law.”

“The entire system of checks and balances is intact, right? We’re still a free country and the logic of the court’s decision has to do with preserving those checks and balances … Congress can’t make official acts of the president illegal, right, without overstepping its constitutional bounds,” Lowry said. “So the idea that something has never happened before, they need a president prosecuted, otherwise, we’re living in a monarchy or a dictatorship is absurd.”

“We’re talking about something specific though, we‘re not talking about some imaginary thing,” Garcia-Navarro retorted. “We’re actually talking about someone who did try and subvert the election, who did actually try to overthrow the transfer of power.”

The Supreme Court’s immunity ruling was in light of former President Donald Trump’s appeal to dismiss special counsel Jack Smith’s election interference case against him. Smith on Tuesday submitted a superseding indictment against Trump in the case, which contains the same four conspiracy and obstruction charges as the initial indictment, but is a condensed version in response to the ruling.