Though he probably cannot be prosecuted while president, he can be arrested and and tried after he leaves office. As a former president, he is entitled to Secret Service protection for 10 years after leaving office. Is there anything in the law that removes SS protection if he is convicted and sent to prison? Or would he have armed protection in prison?
Nitpick: The 10 years protection rule was rather brief. Barack Obama signed the law reinstating it back to life for SS protection in 2013 and it is retroactive for both him, George W Bush and also applies all future Presidents. I don’t know of anything in the law (The Former Presidents Act also known also as FPA; 3 U.S.C. § 102) that puts any conditions on the various benefits it provides to former Presidents. I suppose that could be changed by Congress in the future but that limitation doesn’t exist right now.
Lots of assumptions here. It matters whether this comes during his term or after. If during, then he would have to be impeached and convicted, and conviction can come with some terms. I don’t know if removing Secret Service protection is a possible outcome. It seems unlikely to me, but the impeachment clause was written long before the Secret Service or protection of any kind was even dreamed of.
Note that the President can voluntarily give up Secret Service protection, as Nixon did.
If it did continue, the Secret Service would probably coordinate with the onsite prison authorities to create what they considered a safe routine. What that would be would necessarily vary with the actual location. You could postulate anything from a single liaison person to a special exclusive guard on a separate wing.
Other than budgetary reasons, there would be nothing to stop Congress from passing a bill to build a specialized “Former Presidents Prison.” Put it out on the prairie somewhere away from everything else, and make the airspace a permanent no-fly zone.
Wouldn’t solitary confinement be safe enough?
I’m thinking, why not just have the Secret Service be his prison guards? Two jailbirds with one stone!
IIRC under existing law a President who’d removed from office by the Senate after being impeached by the House wouldn’t be entitled to any benefits given to former Presidents (pension, Secret Service protection, etc), but I think the law is silent on what happens if a former President is convicted in a criminal court after their term ends or they resign. This seems like something Congress isn’t going to address unless/until it actually happens.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
More realistically, I wonder if former Presidential candidates would receive SS protection in jail?
in other countries former presidents have been sent to prison. Peru is 1 example. I assume those guys have been stripped on benefits.
I don’t think they are entitled to protection after the election.
Of course they are. It’s been cited in this very thread.
Only if they are elected.
Oh, I see what you meant now. My bad.
That’s a NIMBY issue if I’ve ever seen one. Maybe out of simplicity and irony, they could put it in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp.
Out of curiosity, why do you say this? I’m no legal scholar by any means, but I see no reason why a sitting POTUS can’t be prosecuted while in office. Have lawyers been weighing in on this?
In Israel, the prime minister was jailed for financial corruption (a couple years after leaving office). They re-built one section of the prison building specially for him to be held alone.
The official reason was that he could not mix with the common criminals because he knew top-secret military stuff, etc.
But the real reason , I think, was that he received a lot of visitors who were well-know public figures— and the conditions in the solitary confinement cells are too unpleasant to make public.
The President probably couldn’t legally be prosecuted under federal law while in office, because all federal prosecution is done under the President’s delegated authority, so he’d effectively be prosecuting himself. But that’s not likely to ever be put to the test, because even if he were, he could just pardon himself. The proper recourse for a President violating federal law is impeachment.
On the other hand, I know of no barrier to the President being prosecuted for violating state laws (which are, after all, where most crimes in the US fall), unless the individual state has provisions of some sort against it. This would also rule out the possibility of the Secret Service agents being themselves the prison guards, since in such a case the prison guards would be under state authority, not federal.
OK, not his guards (depending on the supremacy clause, perhaps?). But, would a rotating shift of SS agents be assigned to be his cellmate? They’d only work an 8 hour shift, of course, so would be home at various times.
If there is a prison term involved, I think it has to be a felony. In practice, it appears that convicted felons can be disqualified, by that fact alone, for a wide range of things presumed to be a constitutional entitlement for any other citizen, including voting, bearing arms, etc.
So in practice, if withdrawing SS qualification for Trump enjoys popular support, all the SS needs to do is say “convicted felons are dissqualified” and it’s a done deal.
It hasn’t yet stopped Trump’s own justice department from investigating him.