[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4973 Placed on Calendar Senate (PCS)]
<DOC>
Calendar No. 494
118th CONGRESS
2d Session
S. 4973
To reassert the constitutional authority of Congress to determine the
general applicability of the criminal laws of the United States, and
for other purposes.
_______________________________________________________________________
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
August 1, 2024
Mr. Schumer (for himself, Ms. Hirono, Mr. Schatz, Mr. Lujan, Mr. Reed,
Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Carper, Mr. Welch, Mr. Hickenlooper, Mr. Casey, Mr.
Coons, Mrs. Shaheen, Ms. Baldwin, Mr. Merkley, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Durbin,
Ms. Warren, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Van Hollen, Mr. Markey, Ms. Duckworth, Ms.
Klobuchar, Ms. Butler, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Booker, Mrs.
Gillibrand, Mr. Wyden, Mr. King, Mr. Heinrich, Ms. Stabenow, Mr.
Padilla, Mr. Peters, Mr. Warnock, Ms. Smith, Mr. Kelly, and Ms.
Cantwell) introduced the following bill; which was read the first time
September 9, 2024
Read the second time and placed on the calendar
_______________________________________________________________________
A BILL
To reassert the constitutional authority of Congress to determine the
general applicability of the criminal laws of the United States, and
for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``No Kings Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) no person, including any President, is above the law;
(2) Congress, under the Necessary and Proper Clause of
section 8 of article I of the Constitution of the United
States, has the authority to determine to which persons the
criminal laws of the United States shall apply, including any
President;
(3) the Constitution of the United States does not grant to
any President any form of immunity (whether absolute,
presumptive, or otherwise) from criminal prosecution, including
for actions committed while serving as President;
(4) in The Federalist No. 69, Alexander Hamilton wrote that
there must be a difference between the ``sacred and
inviolable'' king of Great Britain and the President of the
United States, who ``would be amenable to personal punishment
and disgrace'' should his actions violate the laws of the
United States;
(5) the United States District Court for the District of
Columbia correctly concluded in United States v. Trump, No. 23-
257 (TSC), 2023 WL 8359833 (D.D.C. December 1, 2023) that
``former Presidents do not possess absolute federal criminal
immunity for any acts committed while in office'', that former
Presidents ``may be subject to federal investigation,
indictment, prosecution, conviction, and punishment for any
criminal acts undertaken while in office'', and that a ``four-
year service as Commander in Chief [does] not bestow on [a
President] the divine right of kings to evade the criminal
accountability that governs his fellow citizens'';
(6) similarly, the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit correctly affirmed in United
States v. Trump, 91 F.4th 1173 (D.C. Cir. 2024) that
``separation of powers doctrine does not immunize former
Presidents from federal criminal liability'' for their official
actions that ``allegedly violated generally applicable criminal
laws'' and acknowledged that the Founding Fathers ``stresse[d]
that the President must be unlike the `king of Great Britain,'
who was `sacred and inviolable.' The Federalist No. 69, at 337-
38'';
(7) the Supreme Court of the United States, however,
vacated the judgment of the court of appeals and incorrectly
declared in Trump v. United States, No. 23-939, 2024 WL 3237603
(U.S. July 1, 2024) that ``the President is absolutely immune
from criminal prosecution for conduct within his exclusive
sphere of constitutional authority'' and that a President ``is
entitled, at a minimum, to a presumptive immunity from
prosecution for all his official acts'', assertions at odds
with the plain text of the Constitution of the United States;
and
(8) Congress has explicit and broad authority to make
exceptions and regulations to the appellate jurisdiction of the
Supreme Court of the United States under clause 2 of section 2
of article III of the Constitution of the United States.
(b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are to--
(1) reassert the constitutional authority of Congress to
determine the general applicability of the criminal laws of the
United States, including to Presidents and Vice Presidents;
(2) clarify that a President or Vice President is not
entitled to any form of immunity from criminal prosecution for
violations of the criminal laws of the United States unless
specified by Congress; and
(3) impose certain limitations on the appellate
jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the United States to
decide questions related to criminal immunity for Presidents
and Vice Presidents.
SEC. 3. NO PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY FOR CRIMES.
(a) In General.--
(1) No immunity.--A President, former President, Vice
President, or former Vice President shall not be entitled to
any form of immunity (whether absolute, presumptive, or
otherwise) from criminal prosecution for alleged violations of
the criminal laws of the United States unless specified by
Congress.
(2) Considerations.--A court of the United States may not
consider whether an alleged violation of the criminal laws of
the United States committed by a President or Vice President
was within the conclusive or preclusive constitutional
authority of a President or Vice President or was related to
the official duties of a President or Vice President unless
directed by Congress.
(b) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to immunize a President, former President, Vice President, or
former Vice President from criminal prosecution for alleged violations
of the criminal laws of the States.
SEC. 4. JUDICIAL REVIEW.
(a) Criminal Proceedings.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, for any criminal proceeding commenced by the United States against
a President, former President, Vice President, or former Vice President
for alleged violations of the criminal laws of the United States, the
following rules shall apply:
(1) The action shall be filed in the applicable district
court of the United States or the United States District Court
for the District of Columbia.
(2) The Supreme Court of the United States shall have no
appellate jurisdiction, on the basis that an alleged criminal
act was within the conclusive or preclusive constitutional
authority of a President or Vice President or on the basis that
an alleged criminal act was related to the official duties of a
President or Vice President, to (or direct another court of the
United States to)--
(A) dismiss an indictment or any other charging
instrument;
(B) grant acquittal or dismiss or otherwise
terminate a criminal proceeding;
(C) halt, suspend, disband, or otherwise impede the
functions of any grand jury;
(D) grant a motion to suppress or bar evidence or
testimony, or otherwise exclude information from a
criminal proceeding;
(E) grant a writ of habeas corpus, a writ of coram
nobis, a motion to set aside a verdict or judgment, or
any other form of post-conviction or collateral relief;
(F) overturn a conviction;
(G) declare a criminal proceeding unconstitutional;
or
(H) enjoin or restrain the enforcement or
application of a law.
(b) Constitutional Challenges.--Notwithstanding any other provision
of law, for any civil action brought for declaratory, injunctive, or
other relief to adjudge the constitutionality, whether facially or as-
applied, of any provision of this Act (including this section), or to
bar or restrain the enforcement or application of any provision of this
Act (including this section) on the ground of its unconstitutionality,
the following rules shall apply:
(1) A plaintiff may bring a civil action under this
subsection, and there shall be no other cause of action
available.
(2) Only a President, former President, Vice President, or
former Vice President shall have standing to bring a civil
action under this subsection.
(3) A facial challenge to the constitutionality of any
provision of this Act (including this section) may only be
brought not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of
this Act. An as-applied challenge to the constitutionality of
the enforcement or application of any provision of this Act
(including this section) may only be brought not later than 90
days after the date of such enforcement or application.
(4) A court of the United States shall presume that a
provision of this Act (including this section) or the
enforcement or application of any such provision is
constitutional unless it is demonstrated by clear and
convincing evidence that such provision or its enforcement or
application is unconstitutional.
(5) The civil action shall be filed in the United States
District Court for the District of Columbia, which shall have
exclusive jurisdiction of a civil action under this subsection.
An appeal may be taken from the district court to the United
States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit,
which shall have exclusive jurisdiction to hear an appeal in a
civil action under this subsection.
(6) In a civil action under this subsection, a decision of
the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit shall be final and not appealable to the Supreme Court
of the United States.
(7) The Supreme Court of the United States shall have no
appellate jurisdiction to declare any provision of this Act
(including this section) unconstitutional or to bar or restrain
the enforcement or application of any provision of this Act
(including this section) on the ground of its
unconstitutionality.
(c) Clarifying Scope of Jurisdiction.--
(1) In general.--If an action at the time of its
commencement is not subject to subsection (a) or (b), but an
amendment, counterclaim, cross-claim, affirmative defense, or
any other pleading or motion is filed such that the action
would be subject to subsection (a) or (b), the action shall
thereafter be conducted pursuant to subsection (a) or (b), as
applicable.
(2) State courts.--An action subject to subsection (a) or
(b) may not be heard in any State court.
(3) Sua sponte relief.--No court may issue relief sua
sponte on the ground that a provision of this Act (including
this section), or its enforcement or application, is
unconstitutional.
SEC. 5. SEVERABILITY.
If any provision of this Act, or application of such provision to
any person or circumstance, is held to be unconstitutional, the
remainder of this Act, and the application of the provisions of this
Act to any person or circumstance shall not be affected thereby.
Calendar No. 494
118th CONGRESS
2d Session
S. 4973
_______________________________________________________________________
A BILL
To reassert the constitutional authority of Congress to determine the
general applicability of the criminal laws of the United States, and
for other purposes.
_______________________________________________________________________
September 9, 2024
Read the second time and placed on the calendar