The ruling by a federal district court judge that Vice President Pence is entitled to the protection of the Speech or Debate Clause is that rare thing; a case of first impression that brings into focus a slab of our constitutional bedrock. It is recognition from the bench that the veep is a creature of the Legislative branch. It is not often that we gain a better bead on the Framers’ designs. Mr. Pence would be doing America and future vice presidents a service to press his case.

Particularly because history has already tested Mr. Pence’s fidelity to the Constitution. That happened on January 5 and January 6, 2021. That’s when the heroic Hoosier withstood pressure from President Trump and a mob not to certify the election results. According to Mr. Pence’s account, Mr. Trump told him “You’ll go down as a wimp,” to which Mr. Pence replied “We both took an oath to support and defend the Constitution.”

Mr. Pence’s willingness to stand for the separated powers is another sign of his mettle. The Justice Department wants Mr. Pence  to answer questions for its investigation of President Trump. The Speech or Debate Clause, though, leaves Mr. Pence no option. It doesn’t say that “for any Speech or Debate in either House” lawmakers have the option to refuse questioning in any other place. It says they “shall not” be questioned in any other Place.

We can only speculate how Mr. Pence made his argument before Judge James Boasberg. For the case is under seal. Reportedly, though, the jurist ruled that Mr. Pence is shielded from testifying regarding what happened on January 6, but compelled to talk to Mr. Smith about potentially illegal activity on the part of Mr. Trump before that day. Mr. Pence has indicated he is mulling an appeal, arguing that Judge Boasberg’s ruling was too narrow.

In any event, Mr. Pence has indicated he’s prepared to take his argument to what he called “the highest court in the land.” In our view he has the plain meaning of the Constitution on his side. Even if Judge Boasberg’s Swiss-cheese view of the privilege holds, though, it still marks a breakthrough. The rest, from a constitutional perspective, is commentary. Mr. Pence promised to stand by his oath, and he has found a toehold.   

A lot can yet happen in this case, and the Sun doesn’t want to get ahead of its editorial skis — per what happened to the hapless though distinguished former judge Michael Luttig. He took to the Times to muse that the likeliest outcome for Mr. Pence would be an “embarrassing spectacle” of legal defeat. He expected federal courts to “make short shrift of this ‘Hail Mary’ claim” and predicted that Mr. Pence “doesn’t have a chance in the world of winning his case.”

The short shrift part has already gone by the boards. Mr. Pence’s privilege could yet be blocked by a higher court. Then again, too, it could be expanded. Mr. Pence, in his memoir “So Help Me God,”  has written eloquently of how, after telling President Trump that the Constitution doesn’t grant the vice president the power to do what the president wanted him to do, he walked to his office, sat down, and looked at the portraits of previous vice presidents. 

The portraits of his predecessors reminded him of the “Cloud of Witness” in the Book of Hebrews. So he folded his hands, bowed his head, and prayed. That’s how he prepared for January 6, when he cleaved to the Constitution in a way that will be studied for as long as there is an America. We are a newspaper, not a medium. We already know what Mr. Pence is made of and also that, in the case ahead, Mr. Pence isn’t the only one being tested.