It’s always baffled me why Americans, who are so proud of their republican heritage, are so obsessed with British royalty. In their Declaration of Independence of 1776, they liberated themselves from British rule and the British monarch, George III. Yet their fascination with all things royal remains a curious national characteristic. So much so that on July 1, in a landmark judgment, the US Supreme Court ruled that the United States now has the status of a medieval monarchy.
Specifically, it resurrected the medieval doctrine of the divine right of kings and made it applicable to American presidents. This doctrine asserts that kings derive their authority from God and cannot therefore be held accountable for their actions by any earthly authority such as a legislative body or court of law. This archaic approach to the constitution originated in medieval Europe and survived until the last decades of the 18th century. Foremost exponents of the divine right of kings were the “Sun King”, Louis XIV of France (who ruled 1643-1715), James I of England (1603-25), and Charles I of England (1625-49). Charles was executed in 1649 during the English Civil War, despite his protests that his trial was illegal, that no earthly court had jurisdiction over a monarch, and that, in his own words, “the King can do no wrong”. His shocking execution marked a turning point for belief in the divine right of kings, but in France it persisted well into the next century. Ironically, it was the American Revolution of 1775-83, along with the French Revolution of 1789, that sounded the death knell of the doctrine which has now been so dramatically resurrected by the US Supreme Court.
So why has the most powerful country in the world, with its proud history of republicanism and its fervent mission of proselytizing democratic values and the rule of law, now decided to become a medieval anachronism? In its July 1 ruling, the Supreme Court declared that US presidents, just like medieval monarchs, enjoy “absolute immunity” for their “official acts”. So it seems that the president is now a king! The ruling was made in relation to the criminal charges being faced by former president Donald Trump over his alleged role in the Jan 6, 2021, insurrection. The chief justice, John Roberts, declared that in the case of Trump vs United States that Trump has “absolute immunity” from criminal prosecution for all acts that can be interpreted as part of the official course of his “core” duties, and “presumptive” immunity for all other official acts.
So all former, current and future presidents are now exempt from prosecution for illegal acts, no matter how heinous, which they carry out while in office. Trump is therefore immune from prosecution for any charges arising out of the insurrection of Jan 6, 2021, and for any other alleged criminal acts. The American Founding Fathers, for whom the rule of law was sacrosanct, must be turning in their graves. The fundamental principle that no one, including the president, is above the law has just been blown apart.
The historic judgment, which plunges a dagger into the heart of the US Constitution, is an indictment of the political makeup of the Supreme Court. Unlike in Hong Kong, the nine judges who make up the court are political appointees, nominated not by their peers or a judicial commission but by whoever is president whenever a vacancy arises. During Trump’s presidency (2017-21), he was able to appoint three nominees to the Supreme Court, giving it a clear conservative majority. This was evident in the July 1 voting, which went along strictly partisan lines. The six conservative justices all voted in favor of granting Trump absolute immunity from prosecution, with the three liberal justices dissenting. One of these, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, made clear her view that the verdict made the US president “a king above the law”.
Sotomayor was scathing in her condemnation of the ruling: “The President of the United States is the most powerful person in the country, and possibly the world. When he uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. … Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune. … Let the President violate the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends. Because if he knew that he may one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be. That is the majority’s message today.”
Her sentiments are reflected in the words of Inderjeet Parmar, professor of international politics at London’s City University. He said: “The Supreme Court ruling gives the green light for a dictatorship in the US. The ruling is a subversion of the Constitution and democratic norms of accountability. … This ruling means the US is unable to claim to be a beacon of democracy in the world, and an opponent of authoritarianism.”
Just over a year ago, the US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, urged the Chinese government “to respect the rule of law” in Hong Kong. He may now need to rethink his position and to direct his advice instead to the American government. No one in Hong Kong, including the chief executive, is above the law. The same is no longer true of the US. Just ask King Donald!
The author is a British historian and former principal of Sha Tin College, an international secondary school in Hong Kong.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
