Charles E. Schumer, Senate Majority leader announced on Thursday that he had introduced legislation to allow presidents and vice-presidents to be prosecuted in federal court for crimes. This would effectively overturn the Supreme Court ruling that recently removed immunity from presidents.

More than two dozen Democratic colleagues joined the New York Democrat in pushing for “No Kings Act.”

The Supreme Court would not be able to hear legal challenges against the legislation or weigh a criminal appeal by a vice president or president.

District Court for the District of Columbia. Appeals would be decided by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Dems Would Rather Forget Here we are, 23 years after 9/11/2001, and it seems like we’re doomed to repeat history, thanks to Kamala and the Democrat’s disastrous policies like the wide-open border and a disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan. I’m Lt. Gen. Jack Bergman. We must remain vigilant in defeating anyone who seeks to do harm to this great nation. Join me so we can defend our homeland together. 1776 Coalition Sponsored

“In a dangerous, devastating ruling, MAGA Supreme Court once again has subverted the will and idea of democracy, as well as the American people,” said Mr. Schumer.

“The Founders made it clear that no man shall rule America. In their disastrous decision, however, the Supreme Court overturned centuries of precedents and declared Trump and other presidents to be kings above law.

It is unlikely that the legislation will get the 60 votes needed to override the filibuster of the upper chamber where Democrats only hold a 51-49 advantage.

The chances of it winning in the Republican-led House is even smaller.

Liberals have been outraged by the conservative majority of 6-3 on the Supreme Court for months, accusing certain justices of ethical violations.

In an effort to appease his supporters, President Biden recently called on Congress to pass term limitations and to impose a code ethics for the nation’s highest court.

Democrats were particularly upset by the ruling of the Supreme Court on July 1, which was seen as a victory for Donald Trump, who had sought immunity from prosecution.

In a case that court watchers say is the most important in recent decades, the justices were divided on their ideologies. They ruled presidents are immune from prosecution if they act in the course of their official duties, but not if they do anything else.

The challenge was filed by Mr. Trump who claimed he would not be prosecuted in the case of election fraud brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith.

Trump critics are frustrated by the ruling, which delays the case against him for election fraud and other legal battles on the East Coast. Lower courts must decide what charges are immune and which are not.

It’s unlikely that Mr. Trump would go to trial until the November election due to the procedural nature and subsequent challenges.