no kings act can be invoked against trump

The No Kings Act would:

1. Reaffirm that Presidents and Vice Presidents do not have immunity for actions that violate U.S. criminal law. No President or Vice President (former or sitting) would be entitled to immunity from criminal prosecution for actions that violate the criminal laws of the United States. The bill will clarify that Congress, not the Supreme Court, determines to whom federal criminal laws may be applied.

2. Remove the Supreme Court¡¯s appellate jurisdiction for all actions challenging the constitutionality of this legislation. The bill would allow Presidents and Vice Presidents to challenge the constitutionality of the No Kings Act in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Any appeal would be handled by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Using the Exceptions Clause of Article III of the Constitution, Congress would preclude the Supreme Court from hearing any appeals to these challenges. It would further remove the Supreme Court¡¯s appellate jurisdiction to interfere with any criminal proceedings involving Presidents or Vice Presidents on the basis that an alleged criminal act was an unofficial action.

3. Establish additional jurisdictional and procedural guardrails. The bill would allow the United States to bring criminal actions against a President or Vice President in any applicable district court or the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. It would also create a presumption of constitutionality for the No Kings Act unless a party establishes its unconstitutionality with clear and convincing evidence. Lastly, the bill would create statutes of limitations of 180 days for facial constitutional challenges and 90 days for as-applied constitutional challenges.

Across American history, Congress has exercised its authority to legislate on constitutional matters.  From civil rights to religion to regulating elections, Congress has often enacted federal statutes directly contravening constitutional decisions from the Supreme Court when lawmakers believed the Court misapplied the Constitution.

In addition to Schumer, Reed, and Whitehouse, the bill is cosponsored by U.S. Senators: Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Ben Ray Luj¨¢n (D-NM), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Tom Carper (D-DE), Peter Welch (D-VT), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Bob Casey (D-PA), Chris person (D-DE), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Patty Murray (D-WA), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Ed Markey (D-MA), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Laphonza Butler (D-CA), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Angus King (I-ME), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Gary Peters (D-MI), and Raphael Warnock (D-GA).