The Supreme Court has chosen not to rush its decision on whether former President Donald Trump is immune from criminal charges related to his actions during the 2020 election. This move allows a district court to move forward with a case exploring the possibility of charging Trump for his efforts to overturn the election results.
As reported by Business Insider on December 22, 2023, the Supreme Court’s decision follows Trump’s request to delay the ruling on his “absolute immunity” regarding federal charges linked to his attempts to challenge the 2020 election outcome.
On Friday, the Supreme Court stated it would not skip the lower court of appeals, permitting the district court to examine whether Trump can face criminal charges for his actions while president, including allegations of obstructing Congress and participating in a conspiracy to defraud the government.
More Read
The charges relate to Trump’s attempts to overturn the election results and prevent Congress from certifying President Joe Biden’s victory.
Although the Supreme Court did not provide a specific reason for not expediting the case, Trump’s legal team is actively seeking ways to challenge the charges to avoid a trial set to begin on March 4, 2024.
A federal appeals court in Washington, DC, was scheduled to hear Trump’s argument after US District Judge Tanya Chutkan rejected his immunity claim, putting the case on hold.
Special Counsel Jack Smith sought Supreme Court intervention to skip the federal appeals court and hasten the resolution, emphasizing the need to address whether Trump is immune from criminal charges before the trial starts.
The trial, focusing on Trump’s alleged election interference, carries significant implications for his 2024 presidential ambitions.
Ongoing appeals from Trump’s legal team could potentially prolong the trial, adding to his existing legal challenges, including a federal indictment over handling classified documents and criminal charges in Georgia related to his attempts to overturn the state’s election results.
Trump accused Special Counsel Jack Smith of playing politics and urged the Supreme Court to approach the matter cautiously, highlighting the strategic implications of the trial’s timing for his political aspirations.
Conversely, Smith’s rejected request aligns with his efforts to maintain the trial schedule, indicating a legal struggle over the proceedings’ timeline.
The Supreme Court’s decision to hand the matter over to a federal appeals court in Washington, with arguments scheduled for January 9, underscores the complexity and urgency of this high-profile case.
