Supreme Court Facing 'Minefield' With Trump's Case

At least one of Donald Trump's four legal cases have a high likelihood of reaching the conservative-leaning U.S. Supreme Court in some facet, legal experts told Newsweek.

"The optics of the justices getting involved are an institutional minefield," Sonja West, law professor at the University of Georgia, told Newsweek via email. "The Supreme Court is supposed to be the nonpolitical branch of government."

Trump was most recently indicted this week by a Georgia grand jury in association with the state's 2020 election results, joined by 18 others alleged to have engaged in false statements, harassment and solicitation of several state and federal officials. All 19 defendants, which also include former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, face one count in violation of the Georgia Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act.

The three other indictments involving the former president include alleged hush money payments made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels prior to the 2016 election; his alleged possession of stolen classified documents never properly returned following his presidency and discovered at his Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida; and conspiracy charges associated with his purported role around January 6 and the Capitol riots that ensued.

Trump has denied wrongdoing in all cases.

"Before this is all over, the odds are high that the Supreme Court will get involved in one way or another," West said. "There are simply too many unprecedented aspects to these indictments for the justices to just sit it out. And it is legitimately the Court's job to resolve unsettled areas of the law."

The Court currently includes three Trump-era appointees: Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.

Cases that affect the separation of powers and the presidency have historically drawn special interest from justices, West said. Some, like Chief Justice John Roberts, may also be concerned about the court's image as presiding "in what might appear to be a politically partisan manner."

That concern would be exacerbated if Trump himself continues to make it political, she added, as he has previously labeled his legal entanglements as witch hunts led by Democratic officials aimed to hurt his political aspirations.

'Name of the game is delay, delay, delay'

Alan Morrison, associate dean for public interest and public service law at George Washington University, told Newsweek via phone that each case presents a different legal challenge in terms of potential prolongation.

In Florida, for example, where Trump is charged in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, the former president's attorneys "will certainly" go to the Court of Appeals to challenge Judge Aileen Cannon's scheduled trial date.

Meadows's attorneys have requested a change in venue regarding the Georgia case, attempting to move it from state court to federal court, according to court records. Trump's legal team may emulate that request by arguing that the jury pool in Fulton County is biased against him.

Trump's team will certainly be moving to dismiss various claims on various constitutional and statutory grounds, he added.

"Trump will file any piece of paper that he can, tell his lawyers to file it, regardless of how legally frivolous it is," Morrison said. "He will complain about if they refuse to let him look at these classified documents under the conditions he wants, he'll try to get the Court of Appeals to tell him and then ask the Supreme Court."

Earlier this month, Trump's legal team requested for Cannon to restore a sensitive compartmented information facility (SCIF) at Mar-a-Lago with the argument that it would be "a more efficient use of government resources."

"The name of the game for them is delay, delay, delay, and anything they can do to delay it they'll do—which will mean trying to ask the Supreme Court to take the case," he said. "And you know, even if the Supreme Court turns it down, it's still gonna be a controversial matter, slow things down and that's part of what Trump wants."

On Thursday, Trump's lawyers filed a legal request to postpone the beginning of the trial date in relation to the Washington, D.C., case and January 6 due to being "more reasonable" should Trump be the Republican nominee and win the 2024 election.

One or more cases 'probably a given' to reach SCOTUS

Craig Trocino, a law professor at the University of Miami, told Newsweek via phone that prosecutors and defense attorneys on both sides in all cases are engaging in "high stakes litigation."

"Every legal angle is going to be explored on behalf of all the parties," Trocino said. "When that happens, whoever doesn't get the favorable ruling from the trial court is going to appeal it to the intermediate appellate court—whether in the federal case that's the Circuit Court of Appeals, or they'll eventually attempt to get jurisdiction in the United States Supreme Court.

"I think that's probably a given that one or more of these issues will eventually wind up there. I don't know what those issues would be yet because even though there's four of them, and they've been bouncing around for quite a while, they're all still fairly young—they're fairly early on in the process."

The legal and political questions intertwine considering Trump's current status within the Republican Party as it pertains to being the GOP nominee next November. If that comes to fruition, the Supreme Court could become viewed through a more political lens than it is now—where its approval ratings have dipped in recent years.

There is also the sentiment that "no one is above the law," no matter who the individual is.

"There's much hand wringing and clutching of pearls when it comes to regard to that," Trinco said. "But when I think about it, I think about the clients that I represent who have no voice, no authority, no significance in the political or public sphere at all. They don't get the benefit for anything, right? So, the judge sets the trial is going to be on this day and you've got to be there.

"If justice is anything, it's a constant and consistent application of the law and so the law that applies to my clients ought to apply to everybody...The judge should set the schedule for the trial as the judge sees fit...and it should move along at that pace and no slower."

West said the Supreme Court is most likely to preside on issues directly related to Trump's status as either a then-sitting president, a leading presidential candidate, or potentially as a newly reelected president.

"One question that seems likely come up is whether Trump was acting at the time in his capacity as a federal official, which will affect whether the Georgia case is moved to federal court," she said. "If Trump wins the 2024 election, the justices will almost certainly need to weigh in on whether a pending case or sentence could move forward while he's in office or whether a sitting president has the power to self-pardon."