Supreme Court Declines to Fast-Track Trump Immunity Dispute: A Blow to Special Counsel

Image: “Supreme Court Trump Immunity Dispute”

The recent decision by the Supreme Court to decline fast-tracking the landmark case regarding former President Donald Trump’s immunity from prosecution for alleged crimes committed during his time in office has come as a significant blow to special counsel Jack Smith. This move allows the appeals process to proceed first, rather than rushing to hold trials in Washington and Florida before the presidential election.

Trump’s attorneys have urged the courts to delay the trials until after the election, while Smith and his team of prosecutors have pushed for a quicker resolution. The Supreme Court’s decision not to intervene at this stage paves the way for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to rule on whether Trump can be prosecuted for attempting to thwart the transfer of presidential power after the 2020 election.

The high court’s rejection of the request from special counsel Jack Smith was summarized in a one-line, unsigned order: “The petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment is denied.” There were no noted dissents.

The appeals process will now determine whether Trump can be prosecuted for allegedly attempting to obstruct the peaceful transfer of presidential power after the 2020 election. The timing of the trial, set to begin on March 4 in Washington, D.C., may be impacted by the outcome of the appeals court’s decision. The D.C. case has been paused while Trump pursues his appeal, and the prosecution’s ability to move forward depends on the resolution of the dispute over Trump’s immunity claim.

A three-judge panel on the appeals court is already moving quickly to address the matter, with arguments scheduled for January 9. If the panel sides with Smith and finds that Trump is not immune, the former president could then appeal that decision to either the full appeals court or ask the Supreme Court to review the case at that point. Smith could also do the same if the court sides with Trump. If the Supreme Court declines, the appellate court’s decision will stand. If the justices agree to take it up, they will have the final say.

The current dispute arrived at the Supreme Court following a decision by U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who rejected arguments from Trump’s legal team that he is entitled to broad immunity from criminal prosecution for acts within the “outer perimeter” of his official duties. Chutkan found that the presidency “does not confer a lifelong ‘get-out-of-jail-free’ pass” and stated that Trump may be subject to “federal investigation, indictment, prosecution, conviction, and punishment for any criminal acts undertaken while in office.”

Trump was indicted on four counts in early August related to an alleged scheme to thwart the peaceful transfer of presidential power after the 2020 election. He pleaded not guilty to all charges. The Supreme Court is separately considering a case challenging the reach of a law that has been used to charge more than 300 people for their alleged participation in the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, including Trump. A decision from the justices is expected by the end of June.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court’s decision not to fast-track the Trump immunity dispute has allowed the appeals process to proceed, potentially impacting the timing of the trial. The outcome of the appeals court’s decision will determine whether Trump can be prosecuted for attempting to obstruct the peaceful transfer of presidential power after the 2020 election.