5 things to watch as Trump’s Supreme Court immunity ruling approaches

The Supreme Court is set to issue its ruling on presidential immunity later this week, with the potential to reshape the powers of the nation’s highest office and launch the 2024 presidential election into uncharted territory.

At the heart of former President Trump’s challenge – arising from the federal charges he faces for efforts to subvert the 2020 election – is the question of whether a former commander in chief has criminal immunity for official acts committed while in the White House.

As judges weigh the extent of that protection, here are five things to watch for as the impending ruling is handed down.

How far does presidential immunity go? 

Nearly diametrical versions of presidential immunity were presented by Trump’s lawyers and special counsel Jack Smith’s team during arguments this spring, giving the justices significant latitude in deciding the issue.

Trump’s lawyers asked the high court to take a long-range view of presidential immunity, saying presidents are completely immune from official acts in the White House and after they leave it.

D. John Saur, who argued Trump’s case, argued that most of the hypotheses raised by the justices could be covered by presidential immunity — including ordering the military to eliminate a political rival.

Meanwhile, Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team argued that only sitting presidents are immune from criminal prosecution and that criminal conduct would get a free pass under Trump’s interpretation of the law.

The justices are likely to come up with a more nuanced answer to the question. They seemed inclined to rule that former presidents can be prosecuted for “private conduct,” although they still enjoy immunity for actions essential to their presidential responsibilities.

How will the judges appointed by Trump arrive? 

Three of the high court’s nine judges were appointed by Trump himself, making any ruling on his immunity all the more impressive.

Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett seemed interested in drawing the line between official and private acts.

Barrett laid out numerous allegations in Trump’s federal election subversion indictment, questioning Saur about whether each act was private — and therefore could go to trial even if judges rule there is presidential immunity for official acts.

Gorsuch indicated that the question at hand is how to “segregate private conduct from official conduct” that could enjoy immunity.

And Kavanaugh sought to identify exactly where the line lies between the two types of acts.

“Just to clarify this, the president is not above the law, the president is not a king, the Founders thought that,” Kavanaugh said. “I think what you mean in response to that is that the president is subject to prosecution for all personal acts, just as any other American is subject to prosecution for personal acts. The issue is acts carried out in an official capacity.”

“That’s right,” replied Saur.

Will Trump go on trial in DC? 

Trump’s federal election subversion case has already been frozen for months, but the Supreme Court’s ruling could cause further delays.

The justices could rule that former presidents are immune from official actions while also ruling that none of the actions alleged in Trump’s indictment were official, allowing the case to go to trial this year.

However, the court could also choose to return the issue to a lower court, asking U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to reconsider whether Trump’s efforts to stay in power qualify as official under its new test — effectively opening the path for Trump to appeal the issue. all the way to the Supreme Court again.

Will it help – or hurt – Trump’s other cases? 

Any decision the justices make will likely have implications for Trump’s other criminal cases — primarily, in the form of delays.

If the Supreme Court sides with Trump, it is virtually guaranteed that the justices overseeing his other criminal cases will be asked to weigh in on the matter. This will push any future judgment even further.

Trump faces federal charges in Florida and state charges in Georgia. He was convicted last month in New York of falsifying business records in connection with a secret deal his former fixer made with an adult film actress before the 2016 presidential election, which he vowed to appeal.

If Trump’s efforts to slow down his cases are successful and he wins the presidency, he could order the Justice Department to drop federal cases against him. While he was unable to instruct state prosecutors to dismiss his cases, experts agree that it is unlikely that a sitting president could be brought to trial while in office.

If the Supreme Court sides with Trump’s sweeping immunity argument, his conviction in New York could also be in jeopardy.

Will it be addressed in the debate? 

The issue of presidential immunity could very well be decided before Trump and President Biden face off during the first presidential debate of the 2024 election cycle.

The Supreme Court will issue rulings on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday of this week. This could be the last week of the high court’s busy opinion season, although it is possible that the justices’ decisions will spill over into the first week of July, with a total of 14 argued cases yet to be decided.

The debate is scheduled for Thursday night. If the Supreme Court has already ruled on presidential immunity by then, it could become fair game on the debate stage.

So far, President Biden himself hasn’t weighed in much when it comes to immunity, but he told reporters last December that he “can’t think of a reason” for total immunity. A close Biden ally, Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), said Biden is willing to accept whatever outcome the Supreme Court reaches on the issue.

This story originally appeared on thehill.com read the full story