In a significant development on Friday, the Supreme Court declined a request by Special Counsel Jack Smith to expedite arguments on former President Donald Trump’s potential immunity from federal prosecution for alleged crimes committed during his tenure. This decision could potentially delay Trump’s trial.
The court did not provide any explanation for its decision, and no noted dissents were recorded. This decision is a considerable setback for Smith, who took a significant risk by requesting the justices to bypass a federal appeals court and promptly decide a fundamental issue in his election subversion criminal case against Trump.
Despite this, both parties retain the option to appeal an eventual ruling by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court. However, this decision is a significant win for Trump, who has been employing a strategy of delay in the criminal case, including a prolonged fight over the immunity question, which must be resolved before his case proceeds to trial.
An expedited review of the issue is currently in progress at the DC Circuit, which has scheduled oral arguments for January 9. The election subversion trial is currently slated to commence in March.
“The real question is what happens then,” said Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law. “Assuming the Court of Appeals rejects Trump’s claim, will it keep the trial on hold pending further review from the Supreme Court, or will it allow the trial to go forward and force Trump to seek a stay from the Supreme Court? It’s still possible that the trial begins on March 4, but the Supreme Court’s apparent willingness to let the DC Circuit go first makes it at least somewhat – and perhaps significantly – less likely.”
Trump’s attorneys argued that the special counsel was trying to “rush to decide the issues with reckless abandon.” They further stated that the political nature of the case warrants caution, not haste.
Following the Supreme Court’s decision, Trump continued to assert his immunity from federal prosecution. He expressed anticipation for the upcoming arguments on Presidential Immunity at the DC Circuit Court of Appeals.
Trump’s legal team had earlier requested the appeals court to examine the immunity ruling issued by District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is overseeing his criminal case. Chutkan had dismissed arguments from Trump’s attorneys that the criminal indictment should be dismissed because he was working to “ensure election integrity” as part of his official capacity as president when he allegedly undermined the 2020 election results, and therefore is protected under presidential immunity.
Smith’s team sought to bypass the appeals court’s review of the matter by having the justices step in now. They argued that it is of imperative public importance that respondent’s claims of immunity be resolved by this Court and that respondent’s trial proceed as promptly as possible if his claim of immunity is rejected.
Smith referred to a Watergate-era case in which the high court also leapfrogged over an appeals court to quickly hear a case in which the justices ultimately rejected then-President Richard Nixon’s claims of presidential privilege in a subpoena fight over Oval Office tapes.
Prosecutors also asked the court to decide whether Trump is protected by double jeopardy. Defense lawyers have asserted that because Trump was acquitted by the Senate during his impeachment trial that he cannot be criminally tried for the same alleged actions.
Smith had pushed back strongly on Trump’s claim that prosecutors were trying to unfairly rush him to trial this March, writing that those claims “are unfounded and incorrect.”
Following the Supreme Court’s order, Trump began fundraising, emphasizing his ongoing legal battles and criticizing the Justice Department.
CNN’s Jeff Zeleny and Kate Sullivan contributed to this report. This story has been updated with additional details.