Trump’s immunity argument could scuttle or delay the Georgia case
The Supreme Court on Thursday will hear arguments on whether Donald Trump is immune from prosecution for actions he took while president, and its decision could sink or delay some of the criminal cases against him, including Georgia’s.
Trump will argue he cannot be prosecuted for crimes he allegedly committed while in office, including his efforts to overturn Democrat Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 presidential election. He says the U.S. Constitution shields presidents from prosecution even after they leave office — a protection he says is vital to the proper functioning of executive power.
Federal prosecutors and Trump’s critics say Trump’s claim of absolute criminal immunity would make the nation’s top executive like a king, not a president accountable to the same laws as other citizens.
“This may, indeed, be the most important Supreme Court case in the history of our country,” said Donald Ayer, a Georgetown University law professor and former deputy attorney general under George H.W. Bush. “The rule of law is being tested today as it never has been before.”
Thursday’s Supreme Court arguments come in the federal Jan. 6 case stemming from Trump’s effort to overturn Biden’s victory in the weeks leading up to the attack on the U.S. Capitol. But the court’s decision also could scuttle the Georgia election interference case and could affect the federal classified documents case against the former president.
Even if the court rejects Trump’s broad immunity argument, its decision could further delay the criminal cases, which are already unlikely to go to trial until after the Trump vs. Biden rematch in November. If Trump wins the election, he could order the Justice Department to drop the two federal cases against him and pressure Georgia officials to do the same.
Only the current “hush money” trial in New York would apparently be unaffected because Trump was not yet president when the allegedly illegal activity occurred.
‘ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY’
During the 2016 campaign, Donald Trump bragged that he “could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters.” Three years later, as he sought to block a subpoena in an investigation of “hush money” payments to a porn star, his lawyers claimed before a federal appeals court that he could not be prosecuted while president if he shot someone on Fifth Avenue. The court flatly rejected that contention.
Now Trump’s lawyers have taken his immunity claim further. As a former president, they say, he cannot be prosecuted for official actions he took in office — even, theoretically, for ordering Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival — unless Congress first impeached him.
That claim came in January as an appeals court considered Trump’s argument that he cannot be charged in the federal Jan. 6 case. The Justice Department has charged Trump with four felonies for allegedly attempting to use knowingly false voting fraud allegations to overturn Biden’s victory.
A U.S. District Court judge in Washington had already rejected Trump’s claim of “absolute immunity.” In February, the appeals court upheld that decision. Now Trump will make his case to the Supreme Court.
In court filings, Trump’s attorneys cite a 1982 decision by the high court which determined the U.S. Constitution’s separation of powers implicitly prohibits the prosecution of former presidents for acts within the “outer perimeter” of their official responsibilities. Trump has argued his efforts to highlight alleged voting fraud in the 2020 election were legitimate exercises of presidential authority (numerous investigations found no fraud that would have affected the outcome of the election).