Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi delivered a sharp rebuke of the Supreme Court, calling the institution “an embarrassment to our founders” over its handling of presidential immunity cases.
“The Supreme Court has been an embarrassment to our founders, just to have immunity for any president, whoever it might be, and to do so and take forever to do it so that justice could not be addressed one way or another,” Pelosi said during a recent interview with The New York Times.
Her comments came in response to the Court’s July 1, 2024, decision, where a 6-3 majority established that former presidents have presumptive immunity for official acts during their tenure, with absolute immunity for certain “core” presidential functions. The ruling specifically granted immunity for official Justice Department interactions, including actions related to election results.
While criticizing the High Court’s approach to presidential immunity, the former Speaker acknowledged her well-documented differences with the Republican presidential winner but attempted to steer the conversation toward broader institutional concerns.
“My thoughts about Donald Trump are well known. I’m not an admirer of his lack of patriotism and the rest, but I’m not here to go into that,” she said.
The ruling impacts multiple criminal cases against Trump, who faced federal indictment on four counts related to alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election results leading up to the January 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol attack.
He pleaded not guilty and characterized Special Counsel Jack Smith’s prosecution as politically motivated. In a separate case, federal prosecutors brought 40 charges concerning classified documents found at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida. After Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the documents case, prosecutors filed an appeal.
Her comments come at a significant moment in American politics, following Trump’s victory in the 2024 presidential election on Tuesday, where he secured at least 301 Electoral College votes, according to The Associated Press.
The timing of Pelosi’s critique of the Supreme Court aligns with her other candid remarks about the Democratic Party’s presidential primary process. In the same Times interview, she suggested that other candidates might have emerged had President Joe Biden withdrawn from the race earlier.
“Had the president gotten out sooner, there may have been other candidates in the race,” Pelosi said. “The anticipation was that, if the president were to step aside, that there would be an open primary.” She added that Vice President Kamala Harris “may have, I think she would have done well in that and been stronger going forward.”
Despite her strong criticism of both the Court and current political tensions, Pelosi emphasized the importance of moving forward constructively. “We all want the president to succeed. We wanted him to succeed in 2016 until they went down a path that we had to disagree with,” she noted.
Following Trump’s election victory, Pelosi demonstrated her commitment to democratic processes through social media. On Wednesday, she posted on X, formerly Twitter: “We all pray for America’s success under the next administration. The peaceful transfer of power is the cornerstone of our democracy. After every election, we all have a responsibility to come together and find common ground.”
A spokesperson for Pelosi later emphasized to Newsweek that the former speaker had also praised Harris’ campaign during the interview. “I don’t think that any review of the election should be predicated on weaknesses, but [on the] strengths of Kamala Harris,” Pelosi had said. “She gave people hope. She caused a great deal of excitement in all this.”
Looking toward the future, Pelosi hinted at upcoming developments within the Democratic Party. “We are going to show the difference. You’re going to see. It’s going to be pretty exciting for what comes next in the Democratic Party,” she said, while emphasizing the need to focus on substantive issues rather than personal conflicts.
Representative Pat Ryan, a New York Democrat, echoed some of Pelosi’s broader concerns about timing in the election cycle. During a CNN interview with Jake Tapper, Ryan suggested that Biden could have created a “real unique opportunity” by withdrawing earlier, potentially allowing for “a different outcome.”
Political scientist Steven Schier previously told Newsweek that Biden might have performed better than Harris in key battleground states.
“The deposing of Biden will remain a great source of controversy within the Democratic Party,” Schier said, adding that “Biden, even with his cognitive disabilities, would have performed better than Harris in states like Pennsylvania.”
