The Supreme Courtroom granted certiorari of former President Donald Trump’s presidential immunity declare within the federal felony case charging him for actions on Jan. 6, 2021.
The presidential immunity protection has stalled the case for almost three months and can miss the initially scheduled March 4 trial date.
The excessive courtroom’s choice routinely stays decrease courts from transferring ahead within the case.
As Catherine Yang reports at The Epoch Times, the courtroom additionally granted particular counsel Jack Smith’s request that President Trump’s petition for a keep be handled as a petition for evaluate.
“The case shall be set for oral argument through the week of April 22,” the order reads.
The events have been instructed to restrict arguments to the query:
“Whether or not and in that case to what extent does a former President take pleasure in presidential immunity from felony prosecution for conduct alleged to contain official acts throughout his tenure in workplace.”
The Supreme Courtroom’s framing combines the varied questions the previous president and particular counsel had introduced to the courtroom.
Prosecutors argued that presidents take pleasure in no immunity from felony prosecution, whereas protection attorneys argued that official acts of a president throughout his tenure are protected by presidential immunity.
Learn the complete one-page order from SCOTUS beneath:
President Trump had initially filed a movement to dismiss the case based mostly on presidential immunity final yr.
When U.S. District Courtroom Choose Tanya Chutkan rejected the movement in December, the protection took the case to appeals courtroom, placing the pretrial schedule in limbo.
A federal appeals courtroom panel rejected this protection on Feb. 6, and in an atypical order withheld its mandate on the situation that President Trump take his case to the Supreme Courtroom by Feb. 12.
Usually, the appellants can be allowed to petition for a rehearing with the entire bench of the appeals courtroom, which could have drawn out the method for a number of extra months. The appeals panels expressly ordered {that a} rehearing petition wouldn’t keep the case.
President Trump’s attorneys then requested the excessive courtroom to remain all decrease courtroom proceedings in a petition to the Chief Justice, and prosecutors responded by asking that the Supreme Courtroom reject the petition for a keep.
Prosecutors had argued the courtroom was unlikely to grant certiorari, as they declined to listen to this similar case final yr when the particular counsel petitioned the excessive courtroom final yr when the movement was appealed.
Additionally they requested the courtroom to schedule a listening to in March if it did grant certiorari, or evaluate of a decrease courtroom’s actions.
The Supreme Courtroom has dismissed the appliance for a keep as moot as a result of granting certiorari would successfully halt decrease courtroom proceedings.
“With out expressing a view on the deserves, this Courtroom directs the Courtroom of Appeals to proceed withholding issuance of the mandate till the sending down of the judgment of this Courtroom,” the brand new order reads.
President Trump’s briefs and any amicus curiae briefs have to be filed by March 19, and prosecutors have till April 8 to reply. President Trump can then file a reply transient by April 15, and arguments shall be heard the week of April 22. A selected date for the listening to was not set.
That is the second case President Trump has introduced earlier than the Supreme Courtroom this yr.
The excessive courtroom can be set to rule on whether or not President Trump is eligible to look on the poll after the Colorado Supreme Courtroom dominated he was disqualified below Part 3 of the 14th Modification, discovering the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol breach an “revolt.”
Jonathan Turley said on X that “the order setting argument on immunity for April 22 is a blow to Smith on the calendar.”
“Fairly than granting a keep, it has constructively created such a keep by scheduling the argument. Be mindful, even when Smith prevails, pre-trial work should await the return of the mandate…
…Even when the Courtroom points a choice earlier than June in favor of the federal government, the trial courtroom should hash out discovery and different motions. That would push the trial nearer to the November election in rigidity with present DOJ insurance policies.”
The mainstream media is distraught…
the tone in MSNBC and Andrew Weissmann is like finish of the world pic.twitter.com/HdAtAcXcCH
— Andrew Fisher (@acpandy) February 28, 2024
Epoch Times’ Catherine Tang notes that the idea of presidential immunity was outlined by the Supreme Courtroom in a 1982 case the place a fired navy contractor sued former President Richard Nixon after he misplaced his job.
The excessive courtroom dominated a president’s immunity from civil go well with was “absolute” and that it prolonged to the “outer perimeter” of his workplace.
President Trump’s attorneys argue that his actions on Jan. 6 have been a part of his official duties as president, pointing to his document of taking election integrity severely.
Prosecutors argue that President Trump has no immunity on this case as a result of it’s a felony case.
The Supreme Courtroom has by no means addressed whether or not presidents have immunity from felony prosecution, making the difficulty untested authorized territory.
President Trump’s attorneys say that to open presidents as much as felony prosecution on this means will solely invite partisan retaliation by opposing administrations and opens up former presidents to prosecution for official acts.
They argued in courtroom filings that felony prosecutions have by no means been pursued towards presidents in or out of workplace as a result of it was understood to “dimish” the workplace the best way a civil go well with would. They added that the courtroom has stated that the correct redress can be by impeachment.
Prosecutors, in the meantime, argue that no felony prosecutions have been introduced towards different presidents as a result of Jan. 6 was distinctive, however a case may have been introduced towards President Nixon, who was pardoned.
Loading…