International

The Supreme Court is skeptical of Trump’s immunity but could lengthen the litigation

The United States Supreme Court was skeptical this Thursday about Donald Trump’s request to enjoy absolute judicial immunity for having been president of the country, but there were judges who were inclined not to fully resolve the matter and return it to lower courts.

In a historic hearing of more than two hours, the nine magistrates (six conservatives and three progressives) questioned Trump’s lawyer, John Sauer, and prosecutor Michael Dreeben about the Republican’s potential immunity.

The high court must decide if Trump has absolute immunity for having been president of the country and, therefore, the trial against him pending in a federal court in Washington for electoral interference and the assault on the Capitol must be annulled.

Most judges were skeptical of Trump’s request when considering that only the actions of the functions of a president are shielded by immunity and not those that are personal.

But there were also conservative magistrates critical of the handling of the case by the Prosecutor’s Office and suggested that they could return the case to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals to determine whether Trump’s actions can be considered public or private.

20260224_estafa_mh_728x90

Trump, a Republican pre-candidate in the elections on November 5, should extend the litigation since, if he returns to the White House, he could order the Department of Justice to close the federal accusations against him.

On the other hand, the Special Prosecutor’s Office led by Jack Smith pressures the high court to make a quick decision and the preparations for the trial of the assault on the Capitol, which should have begun on March 4 but was suspended due to Trump’s request for immunity, can be resumed.

It is unknown when the Supreme Court will issue its ruling, but it usually publishes its decisions in June, before the summer recess.

Although it is not included in the Constitution or in the laws, the active presidents of the United States have historically enjoyed immunity from judicial processes related to their functions, in order to avoid a violation of the separation between the executive and judicial branches.

Questioned by conservative judge Amy Coney Barrett, appointed by Trump himself, the Republican’s lawyer admitted that some of the actions that the former president carried out after the 2020 elections were “private” and probably not protected by immunity.

20260224_estafa_mh_728x90

Later, the also conservative Samuel Alito pressured the prosecutor with the idea that leaving the former presidents unprotected would “destabilize” democracy because it would open the door for the new leaders to imprison their predecessors for revenge.

Progressive judges were very opposed to Trump’s absolute immunity.

Elena Kagan recalled that the drafters of the Constitution were opposed to the existence of a “monarch” who was “above the law” and Ketanji Brown Jackson suggested that the pardon that Richard Nixon received after the Watergate scandal shows that the former presidents can be prosecuted.

Unlike Trump, however, Nixon was not formally charged with any crime. His successor, Gerald Ford (1974-1977), granted him a preventive pardon for any crime he could have committed during his Presidency to prevent him from being prosecuted in the future, in a controversial decision that divided the country.

20260224_estafa_mh_728x90

International

US panel backs Trump-themed coin amid controversy

The United States Department of the Treasury confirmed to AFP that the Commission of Fine Arts approved the design of a new collectible coin featuring Donald Trump, with members of the commission appointed by the current administration.

According to the proposal, the coin will feature an image of Trump standing with clenched fists over a desk on the obverse, while the reverse will display an eagle, a traditional symbol of the United States.

The sale price of the collectible has not yet been disclosed, although the United States Mint typically offers similar items for more than $1,000.

“There is no more iconic portrait for the front of these coins than that of our president Donald Trump,” U.S. Treasurer Brandon Beach said in a statement sent to AFP. He added that two additional coins — a $1 piece and a one-ounce gold coin — are also under consideration.

However, the Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee (CCAC), another body responsible for reviewing new coin proposals, declined to discuss the Trump design in late February.

20260224_estafa_mh_728x90

“Only nations governed by kings or dictators place the image of a sitting leader on their currency,” said Donald Scarinciat the time. “No country in the world has minted coins featuring a democratically elected leader during their term in office,” he added.

When contacted by AFP, the Treasury Department did not immediately respond to requests for further comment.

International

Fed’s Waller warns of rising inflation risks amid Middle East conflict

Christopher Waller, a governor at the Federal Reserve, said Friday that he is increasingly concerned about the inflationary impact of the ongoing conflict involving United States and Israel against Iran, particularly due to the prolonged closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

Waller, who had supported interest rate cuts over the past year amid concerns about the labor market, said he has shifted his stance in recent weeks due to rising inflation risks.

“Since the Strait of Hormuz was closed, it suggests this conflict could be much more prolonged and that oil prices will remain elevated for longer,” Waller said in an interview with CNBC.

“Therefore, this indicates that inflation is a greater concern than I had previously assessed,” he added.

Waller also backed the Federal Reserve’s decision earlier this week to keep interest rates unchanged, signaling a more cautious approach as global geopolitical tensions continue to affect economic outlooks.

20260224_estafa_mh_728x90

International

Brazil offers to mediate Colombia-Ecuador tensions, calls for restraint

The government of Brazil has offered to mediate in the ongoing tensions between Colombia and Ecuador, while calling on both nations to exercise restraint.

In a statement released Wednesday, Brazil’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs urged the parties involved to act with moderation and seek a peaceful resolution to the dispute.

“Brazil encourages all sides to act with moderation in order to find a peaceful solution to the controversy. It stands ready to support dialogue efforts aimed at preserving peace and security in the region,” the statement said.

Brazil also expressed “serious concern” over reports of deaths in the border area between Colombia and Ecuador, noting that the circumstances surrounding the incidents have not yet been clarified.

The diplomatic move comes amid rising tensions between the neighboring countries, increasing regional concern over stability and security along their shared border.