Atin Ito First Filipino Community Newspaper in Ontario
Justices to hear arguments in late April, with decision likely to come no later than end of June.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to decide whether former U.S. president Donald Trump can be prosecuted on charges he interfered with the 2020 election, calling into question whether his case could go to trial before the November election.
While the court set a course for a quick resolution, it maintained a hold on preparations for a trial focused on Trump’s efforts to overturn his election loss. The court will hear arguments in late April, with a decision likely no later than the end of June.
The court said in an unsigned statement that it will consider “whether and if so to what extent does a former president enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office.”
That timeline is much faster than usual, but assuming the justices deny Trump’s immunity bid, it’s not clear whether a trial can be scheduled and concluded before the November election.
Early voting in some states will begin in September. Trump’s lawyers have sought to put off a trial until after the election.
Trump wrote on his social media platform Truth Social that legal scholars “are extremely thankful” the court stepped in to decide on immunity.
“Presidents will always be concerned, and even paralyzed, by the prospect of wrongful prosecution and retaliation after they leave office,” he wrote.
By taking up the legally untested question now, the justices have created a scenario of uncertainty that special counsel Jack Smith had sought to avoid when he first asked the high court in December to immediately intervene. In his latest court filing, Smith had suggested arguments a full month earlier than the late April timeframe.
A Smith spokesperson declined to comment.
The Supreme Court has previously held that presidents are immune from civil liability for official acts, and Trump’s lawyers have for months argued that that protection should be extended to criminal prosecution as well.
Trump lawyers seek delays
The trial date, already postponed once by Trump’s immunity appeal, is of paramount importance to both sides.
Prosecutors are looking to bring Trump to trial this year while defence lawyers have been seeking delays in his criminal cases.
If Trump were to be elected with the case pending, he could presumably use his authority as head of the executive branch to order the Justice Department to dismiss it or could potentially seek to pardon himself.
Though their Supreme Court filing did not explicitly mention the upcoming November election or Trump’s status as the Republican primary front-runner, prosecutors described the case as having “unique national importance” and said “delay in the resolution of these charges threatens to frustrate the public interest in a speedy and fair verdict.”
Trump’s lawyers have cast the prosecution in partisan terms, telling the justices that “a months-long criminal trial of President Trump at the height of election season will radically disrupt [his] ability to campaign against President Biden — which appears to be the whole point of the special counsel’s persistent demands for expedition.”
Lower courts have so far rejected Trump’s novel claim that former presidents enjoy absolute immunity for actions that fall within their official job duties.
A panel of appellate judges in Washington ruled earlier in February that U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who would preside over the election interference trial, was right to say that the case could proceed and that Trump can be prosecuted for actions undertaken while in the White House and in the run-up to Jan. 6, 2021, when a mob of his supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol.
The issue reached the high court because the appeals court refused to grant the delay that Trump had sought.
Trump found liable for $355M at civil fraud trial
Former U.S. president Donald Trump must pay over $450 million US in fines and interest for fraudulently overstating his net worth to dupe lenders as a result of his civil fraud trial in New York, another legal setback that imperils his real estate empire.
Separate Supreme Court case pending
The case is separate from the high court’s consideration of Trump’s appeal to remain on the presidential ballot despite attempts to kick him off because of his efforts following his election loss in 2020.
During arguments on Feb. 8, the court seemed likely to side with Trump.
A decision could come any time. The high court also will hear an appeal in April from one of the more than 1,200 people charged in the Capitol riot.
The case could upend a charge prosecutors have brought against more than 300 people, including Trump.
Multiple legal battles
Special counsel Smith’s election interference case in Washington is one of four prosecutions Trump faces as he seeks to reclaim the White House.
His trial in New York is scheduled to begin March 25 in connection with hush money payments made to porn actor Stormy Daniels.
Trump also has been indicted in Florida on federal charges that he illegally retained classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate, a case that was also brought by Smith and is set for trial in May.
He’s also charged in state court in Georgia with scheming to subvert that state’s 2020 election. He has denied any wrongdoing.
U.S. Supreme Court grills lawyers in Trump disqualification case | About That
The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments about whether former president Donald Trump is constitutionally ineligible to hold office again after the Colorado Supreme Court voted to remove him from that state’s ballot. Andrew Chang breaks down key arguments from the proceedings.
*****
Credit belongs to : www.cbc.ca
