Was former President Donald Trump protected by presidential immunity when he tried to overturn the results of the 2020 election? The Supreme Court of the United States refused, Friday, December 22, to rule urgently on this question, a boon for the Republican who hopes to postpone the start of his trial. The billionaire, candidate for the 2024 election, must be judged from March 4 for his pressure during the last presidential election.
His lawyers, who are trying by all means to delay the start of his trial so that it does not coincide with the electoral calendar, assert that Donald Trump enjoys a “absolute immunity” for his actions while in the White House. And that he should, for this reason, not be judged. Judge Tanya Chutkan, who will preside over the proceedings of this federal trial, rejected a first request for immunity in early December, considering that no text protected a former president against criminal prosecution.
Donald Trump’s lawyers appealed this decision, asking the Court of Appeal to rule on the subject. This additional step could, however, take many weeks and risks, ultimately, postponing the start of the former president’s trial. In mid-December, federal prosecutor Jack Smith appealed to the United States Supreme Court, asking the country’s highest court to rule directly on this question, without waiting for the Court of Appeal. Which the Supreme Court, with a conservative majority because it was largely overhauled by Donald Trump, therefore refused.
Similar attempts to invoke presidential immunity for Donald Trump have been rejected by judges, but the temple of American law has never directly said whether a former head of state enjoyed immunity from criminal prosecution. The case law is all the more vague as Donald Trump is the first former president of the United States to be criminally charged.
The Republican billionaire is preparing to experience an extraordinary year in every way, punctuated by comings and goings between the courts and the campaign platforms.