The nation’s highest court is set to hear a claim that former president Donald Trump should be granted immunity from being charged with election interference.
On Feb. 28, the Supreme Court announced that it would decide if and “to what extent” a president, including Trump, “enjoy[s] presidential immunity from criminal prosecution” related to allegations that certain actions “involve official acts” while he is in the White House.
Trump’s legal team has made the claim that he has a right to exercise presidential immunity in the ongoing case brought on by Special Counsel Jack Smith. The case alleges that the former president is guilty of criminal charges of election interference.
News Flash! The Supreme Court will hear Donald Trump's Presidential immunity plea.
The Supreme Court will hear the case April 22nd with expected ruling by the end of June!
Big blow to Jack Smith!
This pushes the trial back! pic.twitter.com/2sjl9fR5VJ— Daniel F. Baranowski (@DFBHarvard) February 28, 2024
The case will be expedited by the Supreme Court, leaving it to start the week of Apr. 22. Prior to the court’s decision to deliberate the claim, Smith’s case against Trump was set to start on March 4. However, the earliest trial date now would not be until May.
Allegations against Trump argue that he incited the Jan. 6, 2021, unrest at the Capitol as a means of election interference. At the time, he was about to leave the White House to be replaced by President Joe Biden and was one of many saying that the 2020 presidential election had been meddled with by Democrats trying to keep Trump out of office.
The federal Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. ruled on Feb. 6 that Trump does not qualify for presidential immunity in the Jan. 6 trial, leading the former president to file an emergency request six days later with the Supreme Court, which blocked the order from the appeals court from taking effect.
Trump later said he is grateful that the Supreme Court is going to deliberate his claim and noted the importance of clarifying the role of immunity for the presidency. The former president said that a lack of immunity would leave the commander-in-chief unable “to properly function.”
As the nation reacts to and analyzes the implications of the infamous case being taken to the country’s highest court, NBC News legal correspondent Laura Jarrett claimed that this is precisely what attorney Jack Smith was hoping would happen, despite his case being temporarily stalled pending the Supreme Court’s decision.
The reporter noted that a ruling from the Supreme Court would cut through any red tape left by lower courts that issue opposing rulings about Trump’s qualification for presidential immunity. She added that, once the trial begins at the end of April, there is no time frame in which the court would be required to deliver a ruling.
