In their dissents, both justices Sotomayor and Jackson addressed the question of whether a president would have immunity from criminal prosecution for acts of murder -- including ordering the assassination of a political rival.

In their dissents, both Sotomayor and Jackson addressed the question of whether a president would have immunity from criminal prosecution for acts of murder -- including ordering the assassination of a political rival.

When the president "uses his official powers in any way, under the majority's reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution," Sotomayor said in her dissent. "Orders the Navy's Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune."

ABC News Supreme Court contributor Kate Shaw said on ABC News Live Monday that she agreed with the dissenting opinion that ordering the hypothetical assassination could be considered immune from criminal prosecution.

"In terms of the application of this immunity to very extreme scenarios like ordering an assassination, I'm not sure the majority successfully explains why this rule would not shield that kind of conduct if it's engaged in an official capacity, even if it's wildly wrong and dangerous and destructive," she said. "If that conduct is done in official capacity, I think the dissent is right on this opinion's own logic. It would be immune, and that is a genuinely chilling implication of this case."

The SEAL Team 6 assassination hypothetical was raised during oral arguments on the case in April.

Sotomayor raised it first while questioning Trump attorney John Sauer. She pointed back to an earlier exchange Sauer had in a lower court proceeding.

"I'm going to give you a chance to say ... if you stay by it: If the president decides that his rival is a corrupt person and he orders the military, or orders someone, to assassinate him -- is that within his official acts for which he can get immunity?" she asked during oral arguments.

"It would depend on the hypothetical," Sauer answered. "We could see that could well be an official act."

-ABC News' Meredith Deliso and Alexandra Hutzler

Ian Sams, a spokesman for the White House Counsel’s Office, released a statement about the ruling stating, "As President Biden has said, nobody is above the law."

"That is a core American principle and how our system of justice works. We need leaders like President Biden who respect the justice system and don’t tear it down," Sams added.

-ABC News' Selina Wang

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan did not mention or make any remarks on Monday about the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity ruling during her first public hearing since the justices sent Trump’s Jan. 6 case back to her.

At one point during a status hearing for a Jan. 6 defendant, when Judge Chutkan was asked about a trial date, she said "my calendar is…" as she made a face and laughed.

-ABC News' Laura Romero

The heads of the Republican National Committee and Democratic National Committee both released statements following the Supreme Court's immunity ruling.

RNC chair Michael Whatley said "today's ruling is a victory for the rule of law and a reminder that the Constitution outweighs the left's weaponization of the judicial system against President Trump and his allies."

DNC Chair Jamie Harrison, however, argued the "ruling only underscores the stakes of this election," in light of Trump's repeated threats against his opponents.

"The only thing standing between Donald Trump and his threats to our democracy is President Biden -- and the American people will stand once again on the side of democracy this November," he said.

Several Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill spoke out about the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity.

Many GOP members of Congress lauded the decision and said it was a victory for former President Donald Trump. Meanwhile, many Democrats on the Hill said it sets a dangerous precedent.

Speaker Mike Johnson said the decision marks "another defeat for President [Joe] Biden’s weaponized Department of Justice and Jack Smith."

"As President Trump has repeatedly said, the American people, not President Biden’s bureaucrats, will decide the November 5th election," Johnson said in a statement.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said in a statement that the immunity SCOTUS decision “sets a dangerous precedent for the future of our nation.”

“House Democrats will engage in aggressive oversight and legislative activity with respect to the Supreme Court to ensure that the extreme, far-right justices in the majority are brought into compliance with the Constitution,” he said.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a series of statements on X that the ruling was a "disgraceful decision by the MAGA SCOTUS."

"The very basis of our judicial system is that no one is above the law. Treason or incitement of an insurrection should not be considered a core constitutional power afforded to a president," he said.

Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., said on a post on X that the ruling "upholds the rule of law in our country and rebukes Democrats’ blatant attempts to weaponize our legal system against Donald Trump."

"Time and time again, Americans have watched the Biden administration do everything in its power to take down President Trump, but this partisan attack will not stand in America," she said.