SCOTUS NEWS
on Dec 20, 2023
at 4:27 pm
Attorneys for former President Donald Trump urged the Supreme Courtroom on Wednesday afternoon to show down a request from Particular Counsel Jack Smith to resolve now whether or not Trump could be tried on legal expenses that he conspired to overturn the outcomes of the 2020 election.
Lawyer D. John Sauer acknowledged that an “inaccurate denial of a declare of presidential immunity from legal prosecution unquestionably warrants” Supreme Courtroom evaluation. However that query, Sauer posited, ought to “be resolved in a cautious, deliberative method,” Sauer emphasised, “not at breakneck velocity.”
The 34-page submitting on Wednesday afternoon got here in response to a request from Particular Counsel Jack Smith, who final week requested the court docket to rule on whether or not Trump is entitled to immunity with out ready for the U.S. Courtroom of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to weigh in.
Earlier this month, U.S. District Decide Tanya Chutkan rejected Trump’s declare that he can’t be prosecuted as a result of his conduct was a part of his duties as president or, alternatively, as a result of he had already been impeached, however not convicted, on expenses arising from the identical conduct.
Trump has appealed that call to the D.C. Circuit, which has scheduled oral argument within the case for Jan. 9.
However even earlier than the D.C. Circuit agreed to fast-track the case, Smith got here to the Supreme Courtroom, telling the justices that until the immunity case leapfrogs over the D.C. Circuit now, “it’s unclear whether or not this Courtroom would be capable of hear and resolve the brink immunity points throughout its present Time period” – and, in consequence, earlier than the 2024 elections.
In a separate submitting on the identical day, Smith requested the justices to expedite their consideration of his petition. The justices shortly signaled that they might achieve this: In an order issued a number of hours later, they directed Trump to file his response in simply 9 days – three weeks in need of the conventional deadline for such briefs.
However within the temporary that he filed on Trump’s behalf on Wednesday, Sauer pushed again sharply towards the concept the Supreme Courtroom must step in now. If something, he recommended, they should transfer cautiously, reasonably than shortly. And any delay from ready for the court docket of appeals to behave first, because the Supreme Courtroom usually prefers to do, will probably be minimal, Sauer wrote, when the D.C. Circuit has already “dramatically expedited proceedings on enchantment.”
Sauer attributed Smith’s need to have the immunity subject resolved shortly to partisan motives – particularly, to “be certain that President Trump—the main Republican candidate for President, and the best electoral menace to President Biden—will face a months-long legal trial on the peak of his presidential marketing campaign.” And Sauer cautioned that Smith’s “request threatens to tarnish this Courtroom’s procedures with the identical look of partisanship.”
Sauer additionally argued that the Supreme Courtroom doesn’t have the authority to contemplate the case in any respect as a result of Smith prevailed within the decrease court docket. The chance that Trump’s trial may very well be delayed shouldn’t be attributable to Chutkan’s ruling, Sauer stated, and subsequently the federal government has not suffered the sort of damage that will enable Smith to file an enchantment.
Trump’s trial is at present scheduled to start on March 4, 2024. However that date is probably going in jeopardy, for 2 causes. First, Chutkan just lately agreed with Trump that his enchantment to the D.C. Circuit largely placed on maintain all pretrial proceedings and discovery, making it tougher for prosecutors to maintain the case transferring ahead.
Second, the Supreme Courtroom introduced on Dec. 13 that it’s going to resolve whether or not the identical federal regulation at subject in Trump’s case can be utilized to prosecute a participant within the Jan. 6 assaults on the U.S. Capitol. As a result of the court docket’s ruling in that case, Fischer v. United States, might have an effect on the costs towards Trump even when the justices finally rule that he’s not immune from prosecution, it too might delay the March 4 trial date.
