Donald Trump’s Immunity Case: What to Know as Supreme Court Hears Arguments
Blockbuster case connected to Jan. 6, 2021, attack on Capitol puts justices in hot seat during election year
WSJ
Since federal prosecutors charged Donald Trump last year with plotting to overturn the 2020 election results, the former president has argued that he enjoys broad immunity for actions he took while in the White House. After months of legal wrangling, the Supreme Court takes up the question Thursday, in a case with profound legal consequences as well as political ramifications, including whether Trump will face a federal trial this fall while in the stretch run of the presidential campaign.
Here’s what you should know.
What are the charges Trump is facing?
In a four-count indictment brought by special counsel Jack Smith, Trump was charged with conspiring to subvert the will of voters by propounding false claims of election fraud and organizing fake slates of electors. His conspiracies “culminated and converged” on Jan. 6, 2021, prosecutors said, when Trump sought to prevent Congress from certifying Joe Biden’s victory.
Each of the conspiracies, prosecutors said, “targeted a bedrock function of the United States federal government: the nation’s process of collecting, counting, and certifying the results of the presidential election.” The indictment charged Trump alone but referred to six alleged co-conspirators, including allies identifiable as Rudy Giuliani and several other lawyers who helped Trump contest his loss. He has pleaded not guilty to the charges.
Trump’s lawyers have emphasized the president’s singular role in the American system of government, arguing that the commander in chief can’t function with the specter of potential criminal prosecution for official acts.
“To ensure the President may serve unhesitatingly, without fear that his political opponents may one day prosecute him for decisions they dislike, the law provides absolute immunity,” his lawyers argue in court papers.
In response, Smith’s team argues that Trump’s sweeping view of immunity runs contrary to the fundamental principle that no one is above the law. In an earlier hearing on Trump’s immunity claims, one government lawyer said it would be “awfully scary” if there were no criminal mechanism to address a future president’s attempt to subvert the electoral system.
Lower courts have sided with the government. In December, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan ruled that Trump’s status as a former president “does not confer a lifelong ‘get-out-of-jail-free’ pass.”
When will the Supreme Court rule, and what does that mean for a trial date?
The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision by late June. If the court rejects Trump’s immunity claim and allows the prosecution to proceed, a trial in Washington could likely begin about three months later, potentially setting the stage for proceedings as voters go to the polls.
If the high court finds a way to rule earlier, that could raise the chances of a verdict coming before Election Day.
“It’s not just a question of what the court will say but also when the court will say it,” said Tara Leigh Grove, a University of Texas law professor.
A number of pretrial matters were already resolved by Judge Chutkan before the immunity battle led her to put her preparations on hold.
“There is a national interest in seeing the crimes alleged in this case resolved promptly,” the special counsel’s office said in a filing with the Supreme Court.
If Trump wins, what does that mean for the other prosecutions he faces?
If the Supreme Court surprises legal observers by ruling broadly for Trump, his prosecution on federal election interference charges would come to an end. The decision could also have immediate ripple effects.
In Georgia, Trump would try to use the ruling to seek dismissal of state racketeering charges brought by the Fulton County district attorney related to Trump and his allies’ efforts to overturn the state’s 2020 election results.
In the two other prosecutions, the ramifications of a Trump win would be less clear.
Trump’s federal prosecution in Florida centers largely on the period after his presidency, alleging that he hoarded a trove of sensitive records at his private club and residence after leaving the White House, and then obstructed the government’s efforts to retrieve those documents.
In Manhattan, Trump is currently on trial on charges that he falsified business records to cover up hush money paid to the porn actress Stormy Daniels in the run-up to the 2016 election. While the underlying payment happened when Trump was a private citizen, the alleged falsifications came after he was in the White House.
Will the Supreme Court simply rule up or down on whether presidents have criminal immunity?
Not necessarily. While the high court could rule broadly on the immunity question, it could also fashion a legal standard for assessing whether certain official conduct falls in or outside the realm of prosecution.
That could leave the lower courts with work to do—and, in Trump’s case, require Chutkan to make further rulings.
It is possible the Supreme Court wants to craft an opinion more nuanced than lower courts that rejected Trump’s immunity claims, said the George Washington University law professor Randall Eliason, a former federal prosecutor.
“That could result in more delay if the case then goes back to Judge Chutkan and she has to hear arguments and make findings about whether or not particular acts in the indictment are subject to immunity,” he said.
