Immunity vs. Impunity: What’s the difference and why is it important?

These two terms – immunity and impunity – are related, but it is important to remember the difference between them.

Impunity is a characteristic of the way a person treats society while immunity is a characteristic of the way society treats a person. The person who acts with impunity does something for which punishment is due, but he expects, or is allowed, to escape the expected punishment. To say he acts with impunity is to criticize him or the people who allow him to “get away with it.” For instance, some say that Israel is now acting with impunity in Gaza, and the United States is not doing what it should to stop it. Putin may have assassinated Navalny, but no one in Russia, or elsewhere, is ready or able to impose appropriate consequences on him: so, he is acting with impunity.

Immunity is a characteristic of the way society treats a person - usually because of his office, or position. Immunity is conferred on a person in exchange for some benefit society receives. To say that someone has, or “enjoys” immunity is to acknowledge his position and contribution to society.

When Trump argues for total presidential immunity, is he disguising his real intention? He acts constantly with impunity, but does he want to shift our focus from his actions and the attitude he has towards his fellowman to the attitude society has - or he argues, should have - towards him? This habit of disguising his real intentions shows up frequently. When he lost the presidential election, he tried to paint the event as “election interference” or “rigging”: in other words, he was not at fault, it was society. And in the case of every lawsuit he is facing, he calls it “weaponizing the justice department” or “weaponizing the law” – taking no responsibility for his own behavior. He thus wants to blur the distinction between impunity and immunity.

Impunity is not a legal idea, but immunity is. Immunity has boundaries, while impunity has none. If a person enjoys immunity because of his office – like the President – then that immunity covers actions he takes in his capacity as President, but not other actions. On the other hand, he may act with impunity regardless of the relationship his actions bear to his office.

All this reminds us that the purpose of the law is to benefit society. The distinction between impunity (which comes from poena, the Latin word for “punishment”), and immunity (which comes from the Latin word munos, meaning duty or obligation), reminds us of two different roles we believe law plays in our lives. Its first role is to constrain our behavior so that we do not harm others. This is the role dramatized in the notion of reward and punishment, and of the Final Judgment. But its other role is to promote peace and prosperity throughout society.

The first role is focused on the individual, while the second role is focused on the community. The first role is an expansion of the role parents play as they educate and raise their children. They tell their children to act or not to act in a certain way, and they reward them if they obey and punish them if they disobey. This narrative of reward and punishment is extended to “the Heavenly Father” in the drama of the Last Judgment - a drama we find in texts as early as the Egyptian Book of the Dead dating from the 16th Century BC.

The second role is less personal: it is focused on the community as a whole, and it is an expansion of the role parents play as supporters of their children’s growth and ambitions. It is noteworthy that unlike the first role, which has been dramatized in the compelling narrative of the Final Judgment - this role has not yet been dramatized. But still, it is this role that we want our president to play.