Lori Falce: Supreme Court decision is 50 years overdue

Apr. 26—On Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard a case that needed to be heard.

The issue was presidential immunity. Donald Trump wanted the court to weigh in on whether a president can be held criminally responsible for his actions. The former president obviously has a vested interest as he faces several criminal trials — in the state of Georgia and in multiple federal jurisdictions — in addition to the ongoing New York state hush money trial.

It's an issue that has prompted much debate — and even more outright argument. There is outrage on both sides.

What will this do to the presidential election? The speculation started almost immediately after the arguments ended. How long would the justices wait to render a decision? Would it delay the Trump trials and prevent resolution before the November election?

This needs to stop being the focus. The Trump immunity issue may be raised by the former president, but it shouldn't be about him.

It needs to be addressed not in terms of immunity but in responsibility. The weight of the presidency should always be addressed in terms of the burden it places upon the individual, not the privileges it affords. If that happened more often, perhaps this question would never have been raised at all.

On Aug. 9, 1974, when Richard Nixon resigned the office and Gerald Ford was sworn in, the question sat there, waiting to be answered: Would a former president be held responsible for acts he committed in service not to his country but to himself?

On Sept. 8, 1974, Ford set fire to the slow-burning fuse of the question. He pardoned Nixon, leaving the issue of charges and responsibility unanswered.

While immunity is important to Trump, the greater issue for the nation should not be whether this one man can face trial. It must be whether any person in that office can.

That is what it means for an issue to be placed before the U.S. Supreme Court. Justices work in the microscope of one case, but their work is magnified to affect everyone moving forward.

Had Ford allowed Nixon 50 years ago to face a court that would decide responsibility, this would be settled. We cannot go another 50 years allowing partisanship and political expediency to decide the crucial question of whether we hold our highest office to the same account as our lowest servants.

Regardless of the outcome, there will be dissatisfaction. There will likely be harsh words about the future of the republic. But whether the court decides the president is not immune from consequences for his actions, that he is or that there is a complicated path between the two extremes, the answer is necessary.

Future presidents — and let us hope we can move on from the same families or individuals trading the White House back and forth — must have a map that shows them what is and is not out of bounds. And Americans need to understand from the outset where those lines are.

Lori Falce is the Tribune-Review community engagement editor and an opinion columnist. For more than 30 years, she has covered Pennsylvania politics, Penn State, crime and communities. She joined the Trib in 2018. She can be reached at lfalce@triblive.com.