The Supreme Court is facing a historic issue this year as former President Donald Trump fights against a multiplicity of charges that he plans to take to the nation's high court.
According to a number of analysts, the case of whether the former president can claim immunity for election subversion is likely to be the most closely watched of the year, as CNN reported.
This case is also possibly the hardest for the nine judges to sort out, something they'll be faced with at a time when the nation is largely divided on the validity of the charges brought at all.
In between Trump’s initial demand for total immunity and an appeals court ruling earlier this year that found he’s entitled to no protection at all is a murky gap with massive practical implications for whether he can be tried before the November election.
At issue is special counsel Jack Smith’s prosecution of Trump’s effort to overturn the 2020 election, including with his actions on January 6, 2021, though the court’s decision could have implications for other criminal cases against Trump as well.
In addition to the bottom line ruling about whether Trump is immune from prosecution, there could be important clues about how quickly the matter will go to trial.
“Trump has already won something,” said Jonathan Entin, a professor at Case Western Reserve University’s School of Law. “As a practical matter, Trump has gained time here, regardless of how the court decides the case.”
It is anticipated that the decision of the Supreme Court will be made by the end of the month.
This ruling, if it goes against the notion of presidential immunity, could have far-reaching implications for the legal standing of former commanders-in-chief.
In February, the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit reached a unanimous conclusion, according to their opinion. The ruling has the potential to expedite the start of Trump's trial.
“For the purpose of this criminal case, former President Trump has become citizen Trump, with all of the defenses of any other criminal defendant,” the three-judge panel of the appeals court wrote. “But any executive immunity that may have protected him while he served as President no longer protects him against this prosecution.”
In a potentially far-reaching decision, the justices may consider granting some form of immunity for actions deemed "official." From the oral arguments, it seemed that there was considerable support for the idea.
If Trump's activities were considered private, such as those he took while running for office or as an individual, rather than official, then at least part of the accusations against him could go forward regardless of the majority decision by the Supreme Court regarding immunity for official conduct.
Some of Trump's acts may have been private, and the Supreme Court's ruling could make that fact very apparent.
