In a filing on Monday, Donald Trump’s lawyer said putting him on trial during the 2024 election season would “radically disrupt” his effort to win another term in the White House.
Former president Donald Trump speaks during a primary watch party on Jan. 23 in Nashua, N.H. on Monday asked the Supreme Court to block a lower-court ruling that he can be criminally prosecuted for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, insisting that presidents are shielded from prosecution and that a trial would “radically disrupt” his reelection bid.
If a president can be criminally charged for actions taken while in office, Trump’s lawyers warned, “such prosecutions will recur and become increasingly common, ushering in destructive cycles of recrimination.” They added: “Without immunity from criminal prosecution, the Presidency as we know it will cease to exist.”an unprecedented legal question that could shape his political future, in this case explicitly requesting that the Supreme Court keep his criminal trial on hold to allow his political campaign to move forward unimpeded. At oral argument in a separate case on Thursday, the justices seemeda ruling from Colorado’s top court that Trump should be barred from the ballot because of his conduct around theby the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit of Trump’s claim that he is shielded from prosecution for actions he took while in office. It came on the same day that Trump attended a court hearing in Florida in a separate criminal case, in which he faces federal charges of mishandling classified documents and obstructing government efforts to retrieve them. In Georgia, a different hearing addressed allegations of misconduct against a state-level prosecutor who has charged Trump in connection with alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election results there.Forcing Trump into a months-long criminal trial, his lawyers said in their Monday filing to the Supreme Court, effectively sidelines him from campaigning, undermines the First Amendment rights of American voters “whether they support him or not, and threatens to tarnish the federal courts with the appearance of partisanship.”The request gives the justices a potentially key role in determining whether and when Trump, who is closing in on the Republican nomination, will face a federal criminal trial in Washington. U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan, who is presiding over the case, had paused pretrial proceedings while the appeal was pending andthe D.C. Circuit, is likely to ask for a quick response from federal prosecutors, a Democrat, and one nominated by Republican George H.W. Bush. “We cannot accept former President Trump’s claim that a president has unbounded authority to commit crimes that would neutralize the most fundamental check on executive power — the recognition and implementation of election results,” the judges wrote.unless Trump asked the Supreme Court to pause the proceedings by Feb. 12, giving the former president little choice but to go directly to the justices instead of seeking a review from the full appeals court. As they decide whether to grant Trump’s request to keep the proceedings on hold, the justices are also likely to consider whether to schedule the immunity issue for argument before the Supreme Court’s term ends in late June or early July. The justices could deny Trump’s request and allow the D.C. Circuit’s ruling that Trump can be prosecuted to stand, clearing the way for trial proceedings to resume immediately. The votes of five of nine justices are required to keep the D.C. Circuit ruling on hold and the trial proceedings paused. It takes four justices to accept a case for review.In his filing, Trump said the Supreme Court should not expedite review of his case and should instead allow him to first seek rehearing by a full complement of D.C. Circuit judges.“Conducting a months-long criminal trial of President Trump at the height of election season will radically disrupt President Trump’s ability to campaign against President Biden—which appears to be the whole point of the Special Counsel’s persistent demands for expedition,” said the filing from his legal team, led by attorney D. John Sauer. Trump’s attorneys also objected to the appeals court’s order that he take the case to the Supreme Court in just four business days or risk having trial proceedings restart. They called the timeline an “unprecedented and unacceptable departure from ordinary appellate procedures.”who earlier had asked the Supreme Court to expedite the case as a matter of public importance, declined to comment. Some legal experts say there is good reason to think at least four justices will vote to take up Trump’s immunity appeal; he is the first former president to be charged with a crime, and the justices may want to have the final word on such a significant issue as whether he is shieldedIf the high court takes the case and does not expedite review, that would further delay Trump’s D.C. trial — a key element in his legal strategy.said during a panel discussion last week that focused on the former president’s legal troubles. “If he can drag this on until after the election, and if he wins, he will quickly kill this case.”Even though the immunity case and questions about Trump’s ballot eligibility are distinct, legal observers have suggested the justices may seek a compromise when it comes to resolving the matters involving the former president. After oral argument in the Colorado case, Richard Hasen, a UCLA law professor, said a “grand bargain” appears to be emerging. Hasen characterized Trump’s immunity claims as “exceptionally weak” and suggested the court could both restore Trump to the ballot and force him to face trial. “Together, these decisions let the voters decide if Trump really is disqualified from serving as president,” Hasen wrote for Slate, adding that it would be a “nice Kumbaya moment” for the court.that former presidents are immune from prosecution, at least for actions related to their official duties, unless first impeached and convicted by Congress.“For the purpose of this criminal case, former President Trump has become citizen Trump, with all of the defenses of any other criminal defendant,” the panel wrote. “But any executive immunity that may have protected him while he served as president no longer protects him against this prosecution.”The special counsel’s office has been investigating whether Trump or those close to him violated the law by interfering with the lawful transfer of power after the 2020 presidential election or with Congress’s confirmation of the results on Jan. 6, 2021. It is one of
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Supreme Court to hear arguments over Trump's eligibility for 2024 ballotFormer President Donald Trump's eligibility for the 2024 ballot is set to be considered by the Supreme Court.
Read more »
Listen Live: Supreme Court hears arguments over Trump's eligibility for 2024 ballotThe Supreme Court is considering a historic case over whether former President Donald Trump is eligible for a second term in the White House.
Read more »
U.S. Supreme Court sounds skeptical of efforts to remove Trump from 2024 ballotMontgomery, Alabama
Read more »
Supreme Court Hears Arguments In Trump 2024 Ballot Case: Live UpdatesPaige Lavender is a senior editor of breaking news.
Read more »
PHOTOS: The Scene Outside the Supreme Court, as it Decides Trump's Eligibility for 2024The website that Washington lives by.
Read more »
Rock & Roll Hall of Fame Unveils 2024 NomineesRock Hall Nominees: 2024 Rock & Roll Hall of Fame contenders for the Class of 2024.
Read more »