Supreme Court to decide whether Trump is immune from prosecution

WASHINGTON (CN) — The Supreme Court agreed Wednesday to review a ruling that held Donald Trump must face criminal charges in his election subversion case. 

The justices will hear arguments the week of April 22. Until the court issues a ruling, Trump’s D.C. trial will remain paused. 

Trump asked the high court for emergency intervention to prevent the trial from restarting after the D.C. Circuit shot down his presidential immunity defense. 

The former president and current GOP presidential front-runner faces four criminal counts of conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election. Special counsel Jack Smith’s indictment against Trump accuses him of scheming to create fake electoral votes and obstructing the presidential transfer of power. 

Trump claims his conduct fell under his official role as president, giving him immunity from Smith’s charges. This argument stems from Fitzgerald v. Nixon, a 1982 ruling that found Richard Nixon was immune from a civil suit stemming from his official acts as president. 

Trump, however, faces criminal charges, not a civil suit like Nixon. Prosecutors also argue Trump’s actions did not stem from or involve his official duties. 

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan rejected Trump’s immunity defense but was forced to delay the former president’s trial while this appeal proceeded. The D.C. Circuit affirmed, finding Trump was a citizen and could no longer reap the benefits of the executive office. 

Trump told the Supreme Court that it was necessary to pause the D.C. Circuit’s ruling to allow his appeal to proceed under a normal timeline. He wants the full appeals court to review the three-judge panel’s ruling before the justices review the case. 

The former president claims his immunity is an entitlement that prevents him from being put on trial, and allowing Chutkan to resume preparations for his trial would cause Trump irreparable harm. 

Trump claims starting his trial would be detrimental to his 2024 presidential campaign. 

“Conducting a months-long criminal trial of President Trump at the height of election season will radically disrupt President Trump’s ability to campaign against President Biden — which appears to be the whole point of the special counsel’s persistent demands for expedition,” James Otis Law Group, wrote in Trump’s application.

Trump argues that the charges in his D.C. indictment mirror those covered during his impeachment. He claims double jeopardy prevents him from being prosecuted for the charges again. 

The former president also suggests that should his prosecution move forward, all future presidents will suffer. 

“The threat of future criminal prosecution by a politically opposed administration will overshadow every future president’s official acts — especially the most politically controversial decisions,” Sauer wrote. 

Smith urged the justices to decline Trump’s delay attempt, arguing there was a national interest in seeing the charges brought to trial. 

“The stay equities do not favor applicant,” Smith wrote. “His personal interest in postponing trial proceedings must be weighed against two powerful countervailing considerations: the government’s interest in fully presenting its case without undue delay; and the public’s compelling interest in a prompt disposition of the case.” 

Trump’s D.C. case is just one of many legal entanglements the former president is juggling while attempting to win back the presidency. Trump’s New York case related to hush-money payments is set to go to trial in March. He also faces additional election subversion charges in Georgia and charges related to mishandling classified documents in Florida. 

Follow @KelseyReichmann

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

Email *

Submit