🎙️ Voice is AI-generated. Inconsistencies may occur.
The Supreme Court may take the "very rare" step of releasing a ruling against Donald Trump in the presidential immunity argument without waiting to include a dissenting opinion believed to be delaying proceedings, according to legal experts.
The decision from the nation's highest court on whether it will reject or proceed with Trump's claim that he can cite absolute immunity to dismiss Special Counsel Jack Smith's election obstruction case could arrive any day now.
The delay in the historic ruling, which still has not arrived several days after briefings were filed and completed, has led to speculation the Supreme Court will uphold the previous ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit that rejected Trump's claims of absolute immunity. The process is currently on hold as one of the judges is believed to be writing a dissent from the decision.
The timing of the SCOTUS decision is also having a knock-on effect on proceedings against Trump. Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is overseeing the federal trial, has already put proceedings on hold pending the appeal process, within the original March 4 start of the trial already scrapped.
Trump, the expected 2024 Republican presidential nominee, has long faced accusations that he is taking every step possible to delay the start of both his federal trials until after November's election.
Steve Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas, was one of those who suggested that there is a chance that the Supreme Court will release a ruling that denies Trump's immunity claim, even if the dissenting opinion is not written yet.
Vladeck noted that in 2019, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito issued a written dissent six weeks after SCOTUS voted to stay the execution of a Texas prisoner.
"It's rare, but it's not unheard of," Vladeck posted on X, formerly Twitter.
Responding to the post, lawyer and legal analyst Lisa Rubin wrote: "In other words, if there are five justices ready to deny Donald Trump a stay, they can decide his motion without waiting for the dissenters to finish their work, especially if any are dragging their feet."
Attorney and legal analyst Jeffrey Evan Gold agreed that SCOTUS releasing a stay ruling without a dissenting opinion is "very rare".
In a separate post, Gold speculated that the delay in the immunity decision shows that conservative SCOTUS justices like Alito or Clarence Thomas are "back dooring" a delay for Trump by "dragging their feet on a dissent."
The Supreme Court has been contacted for comment via email.
Harvard Law professor emeritus Laurence Tribe previously told Newsweek that there is "zero chance" that the Supreme Court will rule in Trump's favor on the immunity argument, but a "substantial chance that it will go along with his attempt to drag this out long enough to escape trial until after this November's election."
Randall Eliason, a former federal prosecutor, and George Washington University law professor, said that while no one can be certain what is happening with regards to the Supreme Court's immunity ruling, the longer it goes without one increases the likelihood that they are preparing to go against Trump.
"I think that's the most likely reason," Eliason told CNN. "Someone is writing a dissent."
fairness meter
About the writer
Ewan Palmer is a Newsweek News Reporter based in London, U.K. His focus is reporting on US politics, and Florida ... Read more