The Supreme Court is scheduled to rule on Monday on a case over whether former President Trump should be immune from prosecution for trying to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
The case is the most closely watched of the Supreme Court’s current session and will be heard on the court’s final day before the justices go on summer recess. The case concerns Trump’s efforts to defend himself against federal charges of election interference.
“We write rules that are timeless,” Justice Neil Gorsuch said during oral arguments in the case in April.
Special Counsel Jack Smith’s indictment accuses Trump of four felony counts in connection with his efforts to overturn President Biden’s victory in the 2020 presidential election. Trump’s lawyers have argued that his actions were all part of his official duties as president and that the president cannot be prosecuted for such conduct.
Could Joe Biden be unseated as the sitting president?
The Supreme Court is scheduled to rule on Monday on whether former President Trump can be protected from prosecution for trying to overturn the results of the 2020 election. (U.S. Supreme Court Collection via Getty Images)
Two lower courts have firmly opposed Trump, and if the Supreme Court follows suit, a trial on his election interference charges could begin before the November election.
Most scholars expect the Supreme Court to strike some kind of compromise between Trump’s immunity claims and Smith’s indictment.
Majority of voters think Biden is cognitively unfit to be president: poll
In nearly three hours of arguments in April, the Supreme Court addressed the question: “Whether, and to what extent, former presidents enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct allegedly conducted in connection with their official duties while in office?”
Two lower courts have firmly opposed Trump, and if the Supreme Court follows suit, a trial on his election interference charges could begin before the November election. (Felipe Ramares for Fox News Digital)
Legal experts told Fox News Digital that while most are not sold on the idea of absolute immunity, Trumpand future former presidents should be given limited editions of it.
Trump calls Jocelyn Nangaray’s mother 10 minutes before Biden debate
“I think the Supreme Court recognizes that it would set a dangerous precedent if a future president could prosecute his political opponents,” former Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich told Fox News Digital.
“According to prosecutor theory, future prosecutors will have great powers to persecute political opponents, so they will set up a limiting principle,” Brnovich said.
A photo taken at the Supreme Court in Washington on February 28, 2024. (AP Photo/Jacqueline Martin, File)
John Yoo, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, said Trump’s arguments were “much more successful than many court observers expected.”
Click here to get the FOX News app
“Only the three liberal justices rejected the idea of immunity altogether. The six conservative justices recognized the need to prevent future presidents from criminalizing policy or constitutional differences with their predecessors,” Yoo said.
