WASHINGTON, D.C. – The U.S. Supreme Court has granted former President Donald Trump’s request to determine whether he is exempt from prosecution on charges of trying to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
The court will consider whether the former president enjoys immunity from criminal prosecution for acts he allegedly engaged in in the course of his official duties, and if so, to what extent. It’s planned.
Wednesday court order The executive order says oral arguments against Trump will begin the week of April 22nd. The order also directs the appellate court to suspend special counsel Jack Smith’s case against Trump until the Supreme Court rules on immunity.
The question has already delayed what was planned for prosecutors. A federal grand jury in Washington, D.C., indicted Trump on four counts on August 1, 2023, and after some legal back and forth between Smith and Trump’s lawyers, the court set a trial date for 2024. Set on March 4th.
The case has been pending since December, so District Judge Tanya Chutkan had postponed the trial date before today’s court order. Today’s order makes clear that pretrial work in that prosecution must remain on hold.
Renowned lawyer Jonathan Turley Said Although the court did not grant a hold after announcing that the schedule was “devastating to Smith,” it argued that it had “constructively created such a hold by adjusting the argument schedule.” Keep in mind that even if Smith were to prevail, any pretrial work would have to wait for the return of the power of attorney. ”
The April 22 discharge order setting discussion is a calendar blow for Smith. Rather than acknowledging reservations, the government constructively created such reservations by adjusting the schedule of discussions. Keep in mind that even if Smith were to prevail, any pretrial work would have to wait for the return of the power of attorney.
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) February 28, 2024
“Even if the court rules in the government’s favor before June, the trial court will have to rush through discovery and other motions,” he continued. “That would bring the case closer to the November election, in tension with existing Justice Department policy.”
The lower court’s precedent-setting ruling ruled that sitting presidents cannot be prosecuted, but former presidents are not immune for acts they committed while president. Trump, who was impeached for his own actions on January 6 and later acquitted by the US Senate, had argued that he was immune from prosecution on the grounds of double jeopardy.
If the court rejects Mr. Smith and the lower courts’ position, it would agree with Mr. Trump’s opinion that his actions in the indictment fall within the “periphery” of his official duties as president, and that all of the alleged connections It may be decided that the facts lie within that circumference. Therefore, he enjoys absolute immunity. That would doom not only Mr. Smith’s prosecution, but also multiple state-level prosecutions against Mr. Trump for election interference.
Alternatively, the court could rule that presidential immunity exists only in limited cases and adopt some test, whether a “periphery” test or some other standard, and then the trial court could send the case back with an order to weigh President Trump’s actions. In the indictment. Those decisions would then go back to the appellate court. The Supreme Court will almost certainly revisit those decisions to determine whether its tests were correctly conducted, and any final resolution of the case will be delayed until after the November election.
The case is us vs trumpUnited States Supreme Court No. 23-939.
Bradley Jay is Breitbart News’ Capitol Hill correspondent. Follow him on X/Twitter. @BradleyAJay.
