No Torts for Trump Act
Summary
The "No Torts for Trump Act" aims to amend Title 28 of the United States Code, specifically chapter 171, to prevent the President of the United States from seeking relief under the Federal Tort Claims Act. This bill would apply to any claim pending on or brought after the enactment date. The bill is introduced in the Senate by Mr. Schiff and co-sponsored by several other senators.
Expected Effects
If enacted, this bill would prevent the President (and individuals who later become President) from pursuing tort claims against the federal government. This would create an exception to the Federal Tort Claims Act, limiting the President's ability to seek legal redress under that chapter. The practical effect is to single out the President from being able to sue the government for torts.
Potential Benefits
- May reduce the potential for frivolous lawsuits by the President against the government.
- Could save taxpayer money by preventing the government from having to defend against such lawsuits.
- Might be seen as promoting equality under the law by preventing the President from having special legal privileges.
- Could prevent potential abuse of power by a sitting President.
- May reinforce the principle that no one is above the law.
Most Benefited Areas:
Potential Disadvantages
- Could be perceived as discriminatory, singling out the President and denying them a right available to other citizens.
- May limit the President's ability to seek redress for legitimate grievances against the government.
- Could be seen as politically motivated, targeting a specific individual or political party.
- May set a precedent for creating exceptions to legal rights based on political status.
- Could raise questions about the separation of powers and the President's ability to defend their rights.
Most Disadvantaged Areas:
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's constitutionality is debatable. While Congress has the power to create laws and regulate the jurisdiction of federal courts (Article I, Section 8), singling out the President for different treatment under the law could raise concerns about equal protection and due process. The Fifth Amendment guarantees due process, and the Fourteenth Amendment (though applicable to states) has implications for equal protection under the law. The bill's alignment with constitutional principles depends on whether the classification is deemed reasonable and not arbitrary.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).