Prof. Richard Painter and Prof. Claire Finklestein's Recent Article Explores the Implications of an Indicted Candidate Winning a Presidential Election

On Thursday, November 7, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) rolled out legislation aimed at overriding the Supreme Court’s landmark decision last month that granted presidents absolute immunity for official acts.

Titled the “No Kings Act,” Schumer’s bill declares that presidents and vice presidents do not enjoy immunity if they infringe upon federal criminal law.

Professor Richard Painter, S. Walter Richey Professor in Corporate Law, and Professor Claire Finklestein (University Pennsylvania- Penn Carey Law School) have published a timely article in the University of Southern California Law Review 98 (2024) that explores what could happen when an indicted candidate wins the presidency. In "When an Indicted Candidate Wins the Presidency: What Happens to the Trials if Donald Trump Wins the Election?" Painter and Finklestein point out several unique problems related to President Trump's legal issues as well as the complicated nature of holding a sitting president legally accountable for their actions. "The greater the power of the U.S. presidency, the more accountability is needed to hold that office in check. Yet, paradoxically, the greater the power, the more difficult accountability is to achieve," said Painter and Finklestein. They also argue that "If the legal system is not permitted to complete these prosecutions free from outside interference, every subsequent President, including Donald Trump if he wins the 2024 election, will regard the risk of being held accountable for acts performed while in office as an empty threat."