If the Supreme Court hadn't gone back in time to release the Trump v. United States decision before the 1940s, FDR would never have been able to give us this photograph.
A recent Supreme Court case revolved around Presidential immunity to criminal prosecution for "official acts". It's opponents allege that what the decision represents is that a President can now do essentially anything they want in their official capacity without fear of prosecution, including hyperbolic examples like assassinating a political opponent.
In reality, it kinda creates categories that lower courts must explore before charging a President in order to avoid frivolous lawsuits that could tie the hands of Presidents from carrying out their duties. The intent is to avoid political lawfare and frivolous suits that could impede action necessary for the Presidency to function. I think the court went too far an that it was a bad decision, however...
Those most upset by it are pretending Presidents haven't already enjoyed and expected immunity for horrendous and illegal official acts already in practice... it just wasn't as well codified before this decision because it never really needed to be. We haven't really tried to charge a former President for anything even approaching the outer limit of official acts before recently, though we should have.