Immunity from prosecution
Immunity from prosecution is a legal provision that allows witnesses, particularly accomplices involved in a crime, to provide testimony without the fear of self-incrimination. This mechanism is significant because it enables the government to obtain crucial evidence in cases where direct witnesses may be absent, such as in organized crime, conspiracy, or white-collar offenses. Generally, the Fifth Amendment protects individuals from being compelled to testify against themselves, but immunity offers a solution by promising non-prosecution in exchange for cooperation.
There are two main types of immunity: transactional immunity, which grants full protection from prosecution related to the testimony given, and use immunity, which limits prosecution based on the witness's testimony or any leads arising from it but does not prevent prosecution based on independently obtained evidence. The establishment of these immunities helps ensure that witnesses can safely participate in legal proceedings, thereby aiding the pursuit of justice even in complex criminal cases. The practice has been supported by legal precedents, such as the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Kastigar v. United States, which upheld the validity of use immunity as a safeguard for the right against self-incrimination.
On this Page
Subject Terms
Immunity from prosecution
SIGNIFICANCE: Offering immunity from prosecution permits the government to compel testimony that might otherwise be blocked by the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
A successful prosecution sometimes depends upon testimony by an accomplice of the accused. This is particularly true for crimes that lack witnesses external to the criminal enterprise, such as a specific victim or a third-party observer. These crimes include conspiracy, bribery, white-collar crimes such as securities fraud, or organized crimes involving the distribution of forbidden goods or services such as drugs or prostitution. Although testimony can ordinarily be compelled, that of an accomplice, who is also guilty of criminal activity, is shielded by the self-incrimination clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
To circumvent this impediment, prosecutors offer a binding promise of nonprosecution in exchange for the testimony. Because prosecution is now foreclosed, witnesses’ interests in not being turned into the tool of their own legal undoing are adequately satisfied. Even if witnesses deem the bargain a bad one, they may not refuse the immunity, and testimony may now be required before any compulsory forum, including grand juries, trials, or legislative investigations.
“Transactional immunity” offers complete protection from prosecution on any matter related to the testimony given. The more limited “use immunity” bans future prosecution based upon the witness’s testimony or on leads developed as a result of the testimony but does not bar prosecution based upon evidence acquired wholly independently of the witness’s testimony. The latter, as an equivalent for the right against self-incrimination, was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1972, in Kastigar v. United States .
Bibliography
Amar, Akhil Reed. The Constitution and Criminal Procedure. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1997.
Howe, Amy. "Justices Rule Trump Has Some Immunity from Prosecution." SCOTUSblog, 1 July 2024, www.scotusblog.com/2024/07/justices-rule-trump-has-some-immunity-from-prosecution/. Accessed 5 July 2024.
Taylor, John B. Right to Counsel and Privilege Against Self-Incrimination. Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-Clio, 2004.
Wolf, Zachary. "The Supreme Court Just Gave Presidents a Superpower: Here's It's Explanation." CNN, 2 July 2024, www.cnn.com/2024/07/01/politics/presidents-immunity-supreme-court-what-matters/index.html. Accessed 5 July 2024.