The Supreme Court Will Not Consider Trump's Charges on January 6 - At Least Not for Now

The Supreme Court on Friday rejected the Justice Department’s request to consider whether former President Donald Trump was exempt from federal criminal matters due to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, siding with Trump’s arguments that judges should allow the appeals court to intervene first, even if it delays the scheduled trial in March 2024.

Key Facts

The court announced the decision in a one-sentence order on Friday, providing no explanation.

Trump is attempting to dismiss the federal charges against him for trying to overturn the 2020 election by claiming he has “presidential immunity” since his alleged unlawful actions occurred while he was in the White House – a claim that U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan rejected, ruling that Trump’s presidency does not grant him “the divine right of kings to escape criminal accountability that governs his fellow citizens.”

The legal proceedings against Trump are now paused following his appeal of Chutkan’s decision, which threatens the former president’s scheduled trial date in March.

The Justice Department and special counsel Jack Smith asked the Supreme Court to consider whether Trump is immune immediately, even before the appeals court has ruled, so the court can issue a judgment during its current term and – assuming the judges rule against Trump – the case could go to trial before the 2024 election.

Trump – who has broadly attempted to delay his criminal trials until after the 2024 election – requested that the Supreme Court wait until the appeals court issues a ruling first, arguing that the matter should be “resolved in a careful and considered manner” and not too quickly.

The Supreme Court did not intervene in the larger issue of whether Trump is immune from criminal trial but simply rejected the Justice Department’s request to consider the case early.

What to Watch For

The timing of Trump’s trial will now depend on the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., which will first address the immunity issue, with the possibility that the Supreme Court could weigh in once it decides. The appeals court has indicated it intends to issue a swift ruling in the case, having scheduled oral arguments for January 9, with a ruling to follow. It is not yet known how waiting for the appeals court to decide the case will affect Trump’s trial date, but it makes it likely that the trial will not occur in March as scheduled.

Additional Information

Trump’s trial and schedule are also likely to influence a different case before the Supreme Court. The court has agreed to consider an appeal from one of the rioters convicted on January 6 – who was charged with obstructing an official proceeding, one of the charges Trump also faces in the federal election case. This case, which has yet to have oral argument dates set, could provide Trump with another reason to request a delay in the trial date, pending the Supreme Court’s decision regarding the January 6 case. A ruling in favor of the defendant in the January 6 case could lessen the likelihood of Trump being convicted of obstruction. It is not yet known exactly how the January 6 case could impact Trump, although former Deputy Assistant Attorney General Harry Litman predicted on X – before the Supreme Court’s order on the immunity issue – that between the January 6 rioter case and the question of whether Trump is immune, “I think we should expect a delay in the trial date of a month or more.”

Information

Interesting

While the Supreme Court has never ruled on whether Trump – or any former president – is exempt from criminal charges for actions taken while in office, the Supreme Court in 2020 forced Trump to comply with a grand jury subpoena for his tax returns. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the Court’s decision in Nixon v. Fitzgerald in 1982 that presidents cannot be held accountable in civil cases for actions taken as part of their official duties, although in Clinton v. Jones in 1997, the Supreme Court clarified that presidents can be sued in civil court for actions taken before they assume the presidency.

Main Background

Trump faces four criminal charges in the federal election case, which is one of four pending criminal cases against the former president and one of two cases related to his and his allies’ efforts to overturn the 2020 election, alongside a separate indictment in Georgia. In addition to two counts of obstructing an official proceeding and conspiracy to obstruct, Trump also faces charges of conspiracy to defraud the United States and conspiracy against rights – all of which could lead to jail time if Trump is convicted. Trump’s claim of “immunity” from criminal charges for actions taken while in office has become a common legal defense for the former president, who similarly claimed presidential immunity in civil cases related to his role on January 6 and in lawsuits brought against him by writer E. Jean Carroll. So far, judges have shown little sympathy for this argument: in addition to Judge Chutkan’s decision rejecting it in the federal election case, judges also recently rejected this argument in the January 6 and Carroll cases. The appeals court found in December that Trump’s post-election efforts to contest the results were “in a private capacity and specifically as a candidate for office, not in his capacity as the incumbent,” and that “actions taken in a private capacity cannot qualify for official immunity.”

Facts

Home

The court announced the ruling in a one-sentence order on Friday, without providing an explanation.

Trump is trying to dismiss the federal charges against him for attempting to overturn the 2020 election by claiming he has “presidential immunity” because his alleged illegal actions occurred while he was in the White House – which was rejected by federal judge Tanya Chutkan, who ruled that Trump’s presidency does not grant him “the divine right of kings to escape the criminal accountability that governs his fellow citizens.”

Legal proceedings against Trump are now on hold after he appealed Chutkan’s ruling, threatening the scheduled trial date in March for the former president.

The Justice Department and special counsel Jack Smith have asked the Supreme Court to consider whether Trump is immediately immune, even before the appeals court issues a ruling, so the court can render a decision during its current term and – assuming the justices rule against Trump – the case could go to trial before the 2024 elections.

Trump – who has widely attempted to delay his criminal trials until after the 2024 elections – has asked the Supreme Court to wait to rule until the appeals court issues a ruling first, arguing that the matter should be “resolved in a careful and deliberate manner” and not too swiftly.

The Supreme Court did not intervene in the bigger question of whether Trump is immune from criminal trial, simply rejecting the Justice Department’s request to consider the case early.

What to Watch For

The timing of Trump’s trial will now depend on the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., which will first consider the immunity issue, with the possibility that the Supreme Court will take up the matter once it decides. The appeals court has indicated that it intends to issue a quick ruling in the case, having scheduled oral arguments for January 9, with a ruling to follow later. It is still unclear how waiting for the appeals court to rule on the case first will impact the timing of Trump’s trial, but it makes it less likely that the trial will occur in March as scheduled.

Additional Information

Trump’s trial and its schedule are also likely to affect a separate case before the Supreme Court. The court has agreed to hear an appeal from one of the convicted rioters from January 6 – who was charged with obstructing an official proceeding, one of the charges Trump also faces in the federal election case. This case, which does not yet have oral arguments scheduled, could provide Trump with another reason to seek to delay his trial date, pending the Supreme Court’s decision on the January 6 case. A ruling in favor of the defendant in the January 6 case could make it less likely for Trump to be convicted on obstruction charges. It remains unclear how exactly the January 6 case could affect Trump, although Harry Litman, a former deputy assistant attorney general, predicted on X – before the Supreme Court’s order on the immunity issue – that between the rioter’s case and determining whether Trump is immune, “I think we should expect delays for the trial for a month or more.”

Interesting Fact

While the Supreme Court has not ruled before on whether Trump – or any other former president – is immune from criminal charges for actions taken while in office, the Supreme Court in 2020 compelled Trump to comply with a grand jury subpoena for his tax returns. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the Court’s decision in Nixon v. Fitzgerald in 1982 that presidents could not be held liable in civil cases for actions taken as part of their official duties, although in Clinton v. Jones in 1997, the Supreme Court clarified that presidents can be sued in civil court for actions taken before they assumed the presidency.

Background

Homepage

Trump faces four criminal charges in the federal election case, which is one of four pending criminal cases against the former president and one of two related to his and his allies’ efforts to overturn the 2020 election, alongside a separate indictment in Georgia. In addition to two counts of obstructing an official proceeding and conspiring to obstruct, Trump also faces charges of conspiring to defraud the United States and conspiracy against rights – all of which could lead to imprisonment if Trump is convicted. Trump’s claim of “immunity” from criminal charges due to actions taken while in office has become a common legal defense for the former president, who similarly claimed presidential immunity in civil cases related to his role on January 6 and in lawsuits brought against him by author E. Jean Carroll. So far, judges have shown little sympathy for this argument: in addition to Judge Chutkan’s ruling against it in the federal election case, judges also recently rejected this argument in the January 6 and Carroll cases. A court of appeals found in December that Trump’s post-election efforts to challenge the results were “in a personal capacity and as a candidate for office, not in his official capacity as officeholder,” and that “actions taken in a personal capacity cannot qualify for official immunity.”

Key Facts

The court announced the decision in a one-sentence order on Friday, providing no explanation.

Trump is seeking to dismiss the federal charges against him for attempting to overturn the 2020 election by claiming he has “presidential immunity” since his alleged illegal actions occurred while he was in the White House – a claim rejected by federal judge Tanya Chutkan, who ruled that Trump’s presidency does not grant him “the divine right of kings to evade the criminal accountability that governs his fellow citizens.”

Proceedings halted
Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2023/12/22/supreme-court-wont-take-up-trumps-jan-6-charges-at-least-for-now/

The Supreme Court Will Not Consider Trump’s Charges on January 6 – At Least Not for Now

Key Facts

What to Watch For

Additional Information

Information

Interesting

Main Background

Further Reading

Facts

Home

What to Watch For

Additional Information

Interesting Fact

Background

Homepage

Further Reading

Key Facts

Read Also

أقرأ ايضا

Comments

Leave a Reply Cancel reply