Giving Trump sweeping immunity would bring 'chaos,' former US generals, admirals, and military service leaders say

• Nineteen former military officials opposed Trump's immunity bid in a Supreme Court amicus brief.
• Trump, facing felony charges, claims he has "absolute immunity" from his actions when president.
• The brief said immunity could hurt public trust, security, and the rule of law.

Nineteen former military officials argue in a US Supreme Court amicus brief that offering legal immunity to former President Donald Trump could cause irreparable damage to the country.

"The rule of law is critical to the military's mission and to the people's trust in the armed forces," the former military leaders, which included nine generals, six admirals, and four service secretaries, wrote in a brief filed on April 8.

Not only does the former president's "approach threaten to inject chaos into military operations, it also threatens to damage — potentially irreparably — the public's trust in the military and the willingness of recruits to join the armed forces," they said.

Trump has claimed that while in office, the president has "absolute immunity" from criminal prosecution. Trump is facing felony federal charges stemming from allegations of attempting to overturn the 2020 presidential election. Oral arguments are expected to begin on April 25.

Trump has pleaded not guilty to the allegations against him and his defense has argued that he's immune from prosecution as the Department of Justice and the special counsel Jack Smith push the case forward. Smith has asked the Supreme Court to reject Trump's immunity claims .

Former military members detailed in the brief how granting Trump, the former commander-in-chief of the armed forces, immunity from felony charges would negatively impact the rule of law, civilian-military relations, and the peaceful transition of power.

The brief said that the provision of immunity for alleged unlawful actions by the president would result in a lack of accountability that could undermine the expectation that members of the US military "abide by the orders of superior officers" but "disobey any such orders that are unlawful," responsibilities that American service members commit to when they serve.

The brief also said that allowing the president to use the military for "criminal ends" could leave civilian appointees and military officers with the "impossible choice" of either obeying the orders of the commander in chief or following the laws of the country.

The former military officials also said that presidential immunity could threaten US national security because the lack of accountability could influence how other nations perceive the US at a time when authoritarian powers are rising in influence.

Other military officials not represented in the brief agreed. "The president doesn't have immunity on these types of issues," Mark Esper, Trump's former Secretary of Defense, told CNN's Katie Hunt in response to the brief and Trump's immunity plea. "It's just absurd."