Yahoo News Supreme Court asked to rule on Trump's claim of immunity from prosecution
The US Supreme Court has been asked to decide whether Donald Trump has immunity from prosecution in a bid by prosecutors to ensure he faces trial before the 2024 election.
Jack Smith, the special counsel leading Mr Trump’s prosecution for alleged election interference, has asked America’s highest court to make an extraordinary intervention to expedite the case.
The former president, 77, has denied the four charges related to his role in the Jan 6, 2021 Capitol riot and other efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
He has attempted to have the case tossed out by arguing he enjoys presidential immunity for his conduct during his time in office.
The presiding judge, Tanya Chutkan, has already rejected Mr Trump’s argument, ruling the presidency “did not bestow on him the divine right of kings”, or a “lifelong ‘get-out-of-jail-free’ pass”.
Mr Trump’s team has referred the issue to an appeals court and asked Ms Chutkan to suspend proceedings in the trial, currently scheduled for March 4, while their claim is heard.
A spokesman for Mr Trump repeated the former president’s claims the case represents election interference.
He called the manoeuvre by Mr Smith a “Hail Mary” intended to prevent the Republican frontrunner “from retaking the Oval Office”, as he “is poised to do”.
“There is absolutely no reason to rush this sham to trial except to injure President Trump and tens of millions of his supporters,” the spokesman said.
“President Trump will continue to fight for justice and oppose these authoritarian tactics.”
Monday’s filing by Mr Smith’s team essentially seeks to fast-track the question to the ultimate arbiter, the Supreme Court, an aggressive step that underscores the special counsel’s determination to keep the trial on schedule.
“The United States recognises that this is an extraordinary request,” Mr Smith wrote. But he added: “This is an extraordinary case.”
Mr Smith has stressed the importance to the public of Mr Trump’s trial for allegedly interfering in the last presidential election taking place before the next one, in November 2024.
“Nothing could be more vital to our democracy,” the filing stated.
Mr Smith’s team has also argued Mr Trump’s claims of presidential immunity are “profoundly mistaken”.
“A cornerstone of our constitutional order is that no person is above the law,” they wrote.
The election subversion case showed “the force of that principle is at its zenith”, they said, after “a grand jury has accused a former President of committing federal crimes to subvert the peaceful transfer of power”.
Mr Smith compared the request for the Supreme Court to intervene to a 1974 ruling they made during the Watergate scandal, in which the panel rejected President Richard Nixon’s claims of presidential privilege over Oval Office recordings.
The earliest the court’s nine justices, three of whom were appointed by Mr Trump, could consider the appeal is Jan 5.
If the bench decides to take up the question, the court would have an opportunity to rule for the first time ever on whether ex-presidents enjoy immunity from prosecution.
