top of page

Will The Supreme Court Take Up Trump Immunity Case?

In a move that angered former President Donald Trump the Supreme Court has agreed to take up a petition by special counsel Jack Smith on whether he can be prosecuted on charges he plotted to overturn the 2020 election results.

A federal judge earlier ruled the case could go forward, but Trump said he would ask the federal appeals court in Washington to reverse that outcome. Smith is attempting to bypass the appeals court – the usual next step in the process – and have the Supreme Court take up the matter directly.

The Trump campaign railed against the Special Counsel’s petition to the Supreme Court to rule on whether the former President has immunity from federal prosecution, accusing Smith of launching a “Hail Mary” to keep Trump from retaking the White House in 2024.


“Crooked Joe Biden’s henchman, Deranged Jack Smith is so obsessed with interfering in the 2024 Presidential Election with the goal of preventing President Trump from retaking the Oval Office, as the President is poised to do, that Smith is willing to try for a Hail Mary by racing to the Supreme Court and attempting to bypass the appellate process,” a spokesperson for Trump’s campaign said in a statement reported by The Hill’s Miranda Nazzaro.


The spokesperson repeated Trump’s longtime assertion that the case against the former president is “completely politically motivated.”


Trump has argued he is immune from the Department of Justice (DOJ) charges on the grounds that his actions leading up the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot were protected by presidential immunity.

The Supreme Court’s Monday decision does not mean it will take up the case—it simply means the nine-judge panel will make that decision on a much faster timeline than it normally would, noted Josh Fiallo of the Daily Beast.


If the case is accepted, it will be the first time the high court will weigh in on the criminal charges facing the former president—specifically, whether his challenges to the 2020 election were protected by presidential immunity, something Trump has repeatedly claimed.


Trump’s election subversion trial was slated to begin on March 4 in Washington, D.C., but his legal team asked U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan to delay proceedings while he pursued an appeal.


Trump’s decision to appeal became public after Judge Chutkan ruled earlier this month that Trump could not be immune to prosecution because he’s no longer president.


In an 81-page filing Smith wrote that it “is of imperative public importance” a decision on Trump’s immunity be reached as soon as possible. He’s previously accused Trump of using legal delay tactics to push each of his quartet of criminal trials until after the 2024 presidential election, where he remains the Republican Party’s clear frontrunner.


Mr. Fiallo reported Smith asked the high court to consider having oral arguments to discuss the matter sometime early next year. He added there is some precedent for his request—likening his request for an expedited decision to a similar case related to the Watergate scandal, when the high court resolved a petition penned by then-President Richard Nixon in about two months.


According to FOX News, the Court has asked Trump’s lawyers to respond to the special counsel's motion by next Wednesday, December 20 – two days later than Smith had requested.


The Court’s next scheduled conference day for consideration of such matters is Jan. 5, 2024. The court's brief order did not signal what it ultimately would do.


"There is absolutely no reason to rush this sham to trial except to injure President Trump and tens of millions of his supporters," Trump's campaign spokesperson said. "President Trump will continue to fight for Justice and oppose these authoritarian tactics."

As Connor Walcott observed in an article for, if the Court rules against Trump and the case is allowed to proceed as scheduled, the former President will stand trial on March 4, 2024—one day before Super Tuesday, a crucial voting day in the Republican primary. Trump has repeatedly attempted to delay the prosecution until after the 2024 election, while Smith has sought to preempt it in what Trump calls “attempted election interference.”

However, it is entirely possible that Smith’s motion will be rejected outright. Meaning, if the Court rules in Trump’s favor, the former President could be granted immunity, effectively ending the case and establishing a precedent for Trump’s other criminal trials.

  • constitutional privileges

  • Trump immunity

  • Supreme Court

  • Merrick Garland

  • Jack Smith

  • January 6 case

  • Free Speech

  • Special Counsel petition

  • 2024 campaign

  • presidential immunity

  • Judge Tanya Chutkan

  • Trump appeal

  • expedited decision

531 views9 comments

9 comentarios

We really need to worry about a massive cyber attack or an EMP against us launched by China or another rogue actor. This stuff pales in comparison. Is the federal government doing anything to protect us? I'm afraid of the possible answer, folks.

Me gusta

In an 81-page filing Smith wrote that it “is of imperative public importance” a decision on Trump’s immunity be reached as soon as possible.

Why? What's this "imperative public importance"? Why the rush? Is Trump going to go out and kill somebody or commit some other sinister deed? Since when does the legal system fail to protect the rights of the accused? There's a reason most legal cases take years to litigate and even those convicted are given every opportunity to appeal. In this case, the defendant didn't actually commit any crimes. He simply followed 240 years of precedents. Jack Smith's modus operandi stinks.

Me gusta
Contestando a

The Deep State swamp rats on both sides of the aisle are scared silly of President Trump. They are desperate to keep him out of the 2024 election.

Me gusta

13 dic 2023

I suspect that Jack Smith believes he could lose the case in DC and is trying to use the Court to gain some credibility in the minds of potential jurors of DC . I also suspect Smith is trying to trick the pool of potential jurors in DC . Since 2020 , those potential jurors have seen Trump govern and know that he did well . I suspect that Jack Smith is worried about the surety of the pool of jurors of DC . I hope the Court rules in Trump's favor and puts an end to Smith'…

Me gusta

I do not have that much faith in this Supreme Court. Roberts has betrayed us more often than not. President's Trumps three nominees blow hot and cold. Thomas an Alito are the only reliable conservatives on this bench.

Me gusta
Contestando a

But getting that pro-Trump decision is the heavy lift here. We would already be behind by four votes at the start (Roberts and the three liberal justices).

Me gusta

This case should be labeled: The United States Supreme Court vs. the CCP. . . because THAT is what this really is.

Me gusta
Contestando a

That would be a great way to give a big middle finger to the liberals and the corrupt Fourth Estate . . . !

Me gusta
bottom of page