Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer announced Thursday that he’s introduced legislation that would allow presidents and vice presidents to be prosecuted for federal crimes, effectively undoing the Supreme Court’s recent immunity ruling.

The New York Democrat was joined by more than two dozen of his Democratic colleagues in pushing for the “No Kings Act.”

His bill would preclude the Supreme Court from hearing legal challenges to the legislation and from weighing a president or vice president’s criminal appeal.

---

---

Instead, any legal challenges would be heard in the District Court for the District of Columbia, and appeals would be settled by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.

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

“The Founders were explicit – no man in America shall be a king. Yet, in their disastrous decision, the Supreme Court threw out centuries of precedent and anointed Trump and subsequent presidents as kings above the law,” he added.

The legislation is unlikely to get the necessary 60 votes to override a filibuster in the upper chamber, where Democrats hold only a 51-49 edge.

Its chances in the Republican-led House are even slimmer.

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

President Biden, looking to appease his base, also recently called for Congress to pass term limits and impose a code of ethics on the nation’s highest bench.

Most notably, Democrats have been distressed over the justices’ July 1 ruling that was seen as a win for former President Donald Trump in his push for immunity from prosecution.

The justices split ideologically in what court watchers have said is one of the most significant cases to be heard in decades, where the justices ruled that presidents enjoy absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken under their core presidential functions, presumed immunity for all official acts, and no immunity for nonofficial acts.

The challenge was brought by Mr. Trump, who argued he was immune from prosecution in the election fraud case brought by special counsel Jack Smith.

The ruling has left Trump critics frustrated, as the decision delays his election-fraud case and other legal battles up and down the East Coast against the former president as lower courts are left to grapple with what charges are subject to immunity and which ones are not.

Due to the procedural nature of the ruling and subsequent challenges, it’s unlikely Mr. Trump will go to trial before the election in November.