On August 1, 2023, Donald Trump faced federal indictment for his failed attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. His defense team argued that the charges should be dismissed due to his presidential immunity. However, legal experts and constitutional scholars have strongly criticized this defense, arguing that it is absurd and dangerous to democracy.
In December, federal prosecutors urged the Supreme Court to intervene and settle the immunity question. They aimed to prevent a criminal trial against Trump before the 2023 presidential election or the possibility of a President Trump dismissing the case upon taking office in 2025. However, the Supreme Court denied this request, delaying the decision until February 28.
Rather than affirming lower-court rulings that rejected Trump’s immunity claim, the justices scheduled oral arguments for April 25, the last day of arguments for the court’s 2023-2024 session. A decision is not expected until this summer.
Trump’s legal strategy appears to focus on delaying the growing number of criminal and civil threats against him. By delaying the Supreme Court’s ruling, it is unlikely that voters will see a verdict before the next presidential election.
According to Norm Eisen, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, the substance of this case is fundamental to the continuation of democracy and a constitutional republic. Lower courts have already rejected Trump’s immunity defense, but his appeal to the Supreme Court has further stalled the case.
The Supreme Court’s decision to take up this case has raised concerns among legal experts. Mr. Luttig, former federal appeals court judge, believes that the delay makes it highly unlikely that Trump will be tried for his actions on January 6 before the election.
The Supreme Court’s handling of this case is drawing comparisons to landmark cases in the past. In contrast to the swift resolution of cases like Bush v. Gore and the Pentagon Papers, the Trump v. United States case has been on the docket for nearly two months. This delay has led to accusations of the court protecting their agenda.
The former president will not attend the Supreme Court hearing due to his ongoing trial in New York City for another scheme related to election interference. Despite his request to skip the Supreme Court proceedings, the New York judge has denied his request.
