The Supreme Court of the United States has taken up the case concerning former President Donald Trump's claim of immunity from criminal prosecution, a move that could potentially delay or even halt a trial. The case, which centers on the extent of a former president's immunity from criminal prosecution for alleged official acts during their tenure, could have significant implications for the 2024 election.
The Supreme Court's decision to hear the case has been seen by many as a victory for Trump's legal team, as it could result in substantial delays to the trial. The timing of the court's decision is crucial, with the possibility of the trial starting just before the November election, in the midst of the 2024 campaign. This raises questions about what would happen if Trump were to win the presidency before a verdict is reached.
During a key exchange between Justice Amy Coney Barrett and the Justice Department's Michael Dreeben, the court heard how the case could potentially proceed to trial this year. Barrett suggested that if the case were sent back to the trial level, it could be heard by a jury without further involvement from the appeals court. This would mean no further delays in Trump's case before a trial, once the Supreme Court rules.
"The special counsel has expressed some concern for speed," Barrett said. She asked Dreeben if the trial-level could sort out what's official or private acts of the presidency in this key, or is there "another option for the special counsel just to proceed on the private conduct?" Dreeben responded that the indictment is substantially about private conduct and that the special counsel's office would like to present a full picture of the allegations to the jury.
However, in Trump's legal world, leaving determinations about his allegations in the case could be disastrous before the election, according to polls as well as the jury pool makeup in Washington, DC.
The Supreme Court has moved faster than usual in taking up this case, but some experts believe it could have acted more quickly. "The longer it takes for the court to decide, the more it helps Trump," said Michael Gerhardt, a constitutional expert at the University of North Carolina. "If it says he is immune to the prosecution, that will be the end of it. Otherwise, it will be a race to get the trial started if not finished before the election."
The Supreme Court's decision on this case will not only affect the timing of the trial but also its scope. If the court waits until the end of its term to make a decision, a trial might not begin until early fall when the campaign is in full swing -- or possibly even after the election.
The implications of this case extend beyond the courtroom and into the political arena. If Trump wins the election and takes office in January -- and the trial has not yet concluded -- he could direct his attorney general to end the prosecution. If he wins and takes office after already being convicted, he could in theory pardon himself -- something unprecedented, and, experts say, would likely be challenged.
More for you:
