US Supreme Court Finally Sends Trump Immunity Appeal To Lower Court

The former president's immunity claim has delayed the trial date in the federal election interference case. The high court is considering this claim.

The Supreme Court has ruled on Donald Trump’s presidential immunity claim. 

Chief Justice John Roberts, in the majority opinion, stated that former presidents have "absolute immunity" from criminal prosecution for actions within their constitutional authority. For all official acts, they have at least presumptive immunity. However, there is no immunity for unofficial acts.
 

The court sent the case back to the trial court to decide if Trump’s alleged conduct is official or unofficial, causing more delays.

The federal election interference case has been paused for months due to Trump’s immunity bid. The trial was originally set for March 4.

The Supreme Court caused more delays by taking up Trump's appeal in February instead of upholding the unanimous appellate ruling against him, which would have allowed a quicker trial. The justices had also rejected special counsel Jack Smith’s request to resolve the immunity question earlier in December. The court then added more uncertainty by scheduling the hearing for the last argument day, April 25, and delaying their ruling until now, at the term's end.

In contrast, the high court quickly ruled on Trump’s eligibility for the presidential ballot in Colorado's 14th Amendment case, deciding in less than a month. Cleared by the justices, Trump could potentially take office again in January. If victorious, he might use presidential power to dismiss this and other federal cases, including the classified documents case.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito participated in the appeal despite potential conflicts. Thomas’ wife tried to overturn the 2020 election, and Alito flew flags similar to those carried by Jan. 6 rioters. Alito blamed the flags on his wife and said it didn't require his recusal. Thomas hasn't also explained his involvement.

The court's appeal focused on whether a former president has protection from criminal charges for alleged official acts during their time in office. The April hearing showed different opinions among the justices. Republican appointees like Alito asked questions that supported Trump. This raised the chance that, no matter the ruling, more court cases might be needed to apply it to Trump’s case before a trial can happen.

Monday’s ruling follows Friday’s decision in Fischer v. United States, where the court limited obstruction charges against Jan. 6 defendants. Obstruction is one of the charges Trump faces in the federal election interference case. His lawyers may use the Fischer decision to narrow the case against him. Whether they can do this successfully may depend on more court proceedings when the case returns to the trial court.