Supreme Court's Decision Threatens to Upend Donald Trump's Trial

Writer

🎙️ Voice is AI-generated. Inconsistencies may occur.

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear former President Donald Trump's claim of immunity in his federal election subversion criminal case, threatening to delay his planned trial as the 2024 presidential election cycle heats up.

In a brief order issued on Wednesday evening, the court said that oral arguments scheduled to take place during the week of April 22 would decide whether or not ex-presidents have "presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts."

The Context

Trump, far and away the Republican frontrunner in the upcoming election, is currently facing a total of 91 felony counts across four separate criminal cases. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges and claims to be the victim of a politically motivated "witch hunt."

The former president's legal team has argued in appeals court that presidential immunity should invalidate his federal election subversion charges, which sprang from the investigations of Special Counsel Jack Smith. The claim was shot down in appeals court, which led to a further appeal to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court's agreeing to decide the matter will add a further delay to the start of any potential trial, which U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan originally scheduled to begin on March 22.

Charges against the ex-president will almost certainly be dropped if Trump wins the election in November without a trial having concluded before then. The Supreme Court currently has a clear conservative 6-3 majority, including three justices who were appointed by Trump.

What We Know

The Supreme Court wrote in its unsigned order on Wednesday that it would answer the following question: "Whether and if so to what extent does a former president enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office."

Prior to the beginning of oral arguments sometime during the week of April 22, Trump's team was given a deadline of March 19 to submit any briefs on the merits of their claim and supporting amicus curiae, while Smith was given a filing deadline of April 8. Any final responses from Trump's team are due a week before the trial, on April 15.

The case, and any potential dates for a trial, will remain on hold until the issue is decided by the court.

Newsweek reached out for comment to the offices of Trump and Smith via email on Wednesday night.

Views

Trump celebrated the ruling in a pair of posts to Truth Social, while claiming that "legal Scholars are extremely thankful for the Supreme Court's Decision today to take up Presidential Immunity."

"Without Presidential Immunity, a President will not be able to properly function, or make decisions, in the best interest of the United States of America," Trump wrote. "Presidents will always be concerned, and even paralyzed, by the prospect of wrongful prosecution and retaliation after they leave office.

"Legal Experts and Scholars have stated that the President must have Full Presidential Immunity," he added. "A President must be free to make proper decisions."

Meanwhile, a selection of legal experts, scholars and Trump critics had significantly different views on the decision.

"There was no reason in this world for the Supreme Court to take this case," Michael Luttig, a conservative retired federal appeals court judge, said during an interview on MSBC. "Under the Constitution and laws of the United States, there's never been an argument that a former president is immune from prosecution for crimes that he committed while in office."

"The Supreme Court is capable of deciding this very quickly, in time that the former president could be tried before the election," he added. "But today's decision made that that much more unlikely."

Former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner accused the Supreme Court of doing Trump "an enormous favor" with the ruling in a post to X, formerly Twitter. Kirschner also said that it was "clear" the court "sold American democracy down the river" in the process of aiding the ex-president.

"I can't see SCOTUS reversing the DC Circuit's immunity judgment," Anthony Michael Kreis, a constitutional law professor at the Georgia State University College of Law, posted on X. "However, I'm a bit surprised there were four votes to attack this issue earnestly. That said, I can also see the calculus of the Court trying to give something to Trump with one hand and taking away with the other."

"The Supreme Court of the United States just reminded us with this corrupt decision that the insurrection did not fail--it never ended," posted the former president's estranged niece Mary Trump.

What's Next

After oral arguments take place in late April, the timing of a final decision on Trump's immunity claim is unknown. The current session of the Supreme Court is scheduled to last until June 20, with any decision potentially being delayed until then.

If Trump's immunity claim is accepted, the case will immediately be thrown out. If the court rules against the former president, Chutkan will likely schedule a new trial date in short order.

While it is not clear that the rescheduled trial would even begin before the November 5 election, Trump may still appear in court before his political fate is decided due to his other criminal cases and civil lawsuits.