[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 126 (Thursday, August 1, 2024)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5781-S5782]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By 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):
  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; read the first time.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the text 
of the bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 4973

       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

[[Page S5782]]

     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.
                                 ______