{"id":16232,"date":"2024-02-29T00:46:56","date_gmt":"2024-02-29T00:46:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/2024\/02\/29\/supreme-court-agrees-to-review-whether-trump-immune-from-prosecution-in-federal-election-interference-case\/"},"modified":"2024-02-29T00:46:56","modified_gmt":"2024-02-29T00:46:56","slug":"supreme-court-agrees-to-review-whether-trump-immune-from-prosecution-in-federal-election-interference-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/2024\/02\/29\/supreme-court-agrees-to-review-whether-trump-immune-from-prosecution-in-federal-election-interference-case\/","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court agrees to review whether Trump immune from prosecution in federal election interference case"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review whether former President Donald Trump has immunity from prosecution in the Special Counsel\u2019s federal election interference case, an election-year dispute that will have blockbuster legal and political implications for the nation.<\/p>\n

The justices have fast-tracked the appeal, and will hear oral arguments in late April, with a ruling on the merits expected by late June. Trump\u2019s criminal trial has been put on hold pending resolution of the matter.<\/p>\n

Arguments will begin the week of April 22.\u00a0<\/p>\n

This will be the second time this term the High Court will hear a case involving the presumed Republican presidential nominee. Separate arguments were held earlier this month over whether Trump can be kicked off the Colorado primary ballot over claims he committed \u2018insurrection\u2019 in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riots.<\/p>\n

The high court was considering an emergency appeal filed by Trump to extend the delay in the trial stemming from Special Counsel Jack Smith\u2019s 2020 election interference case, arguing that he has presidential immunity to protect him from prosecution.<\/p>\n

That request came just days after a D.C. appeals court ruled the former president and 2024 GOP front-runner is not immune from prosecution in Smith\u2019s case.<\/p>\n

The request was for temporary relief, to stay or block the appeals court mandate from taking effect, which would give the Trump legal team more time to file an appeal to the Supreme Court on the merits of whether a former president deserves immunity from criminal prosecution for actions while in office.<\/p>\n

Smith, days later, requested that the U.S. Supreme Court reject Trump\u2019s bid to delay his trial.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Though the special counsel\u2019s filing does not explicitly mention the upcoming November election or Trump\u2019s status as the Republican primary front-runner, prosecutors described the case as having \u2018unique national importance\u2019 and said that \u2018delay in the resolution of these charges threatens to frustrate the public interest in a speedy and fair verdict.\u2019<\/p>\n

The trial stemming from Smith\u2019s case against Trump has been on hold pending resolution of the immunity question.<\/p>\n

\u2018If the prosecution of a President is upheld, such prosecutions will recur and become increasingly common, ushering in destructive cycles of recrimination,\u2019 the Trump request stated. \u2018Criminal prosecution, with its greater stigma and more severe penalties, imposes a far greater \u2018personal vulnerability\u2019 on the President than any civil penalty.\u2019<\/p>\n

The request added, \u2018The threat of future criminal prosecution by a politically opposed Administration will overshadow every future President\u2019s official acts \u2014 especially the most politically controversial decisions.\u2019<\/p>\n

The request states that the president\u2019s \u2018political opponents will seek to influence and control his or her decisions via effective extortion or blackmail with the threat, explicit or implicit, of indictment by a future, hostile Administration, for acts that do not warrant any such prosecution.\u2019<\/p>\n

\u2018This threat will hang like a millstone around every future President\u2019s neck, distorting Presidential decision-making, undermining the President\u2019s independence, and clouding the President\u2019s ability \u2018to deal fearlessly and impartially with\u2019 the duties of his office.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

Trump\u2019s lawyers added, \u2018Without immunity from criminal prosecution, the Presidency as we know it will cease to exist.\u2019\u00a0<\/p>\n

The decision comes after Washington, D.C., federal Judge\u00a0Tanya Chutkan officially delayed the trial, which was set to begin on Monday \u2014 a day before the critical\u00a0Super Tuesday primary contests, when Alabama, Alaska, American Samoa, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia and Vermont vote to select a GOP nominee.<\/p>\n

Chutkan said in December that she does not have jurisdiction over the matter while it is pending before the Supreme Court, and she put a pause on\u00a0the case\u00a0against the Republican 2024 front-runner until the high court determines its involvement.<\/p>\n

Smith charged the former president with conspiracy to defraud the United States; conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding; obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding; and conspiracy against rights. Those charges stemmed from Smith\u2019s investigation into whether Trump was involved in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot and any alleged interference in the 2020 election result.<\/p>\n

Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges in August.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS<\/div>\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review whether former President Donald Trump has immunity from prosecution in the Special Counsel\u2019s federal election interference case, an election-year dispute that will have blockbuster legal and political implications for the nation. The justices have fast-tracked the appeal, and will hear oral arguments in late April, with a <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":16233,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[25],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-16232","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-politics"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16232","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=16232"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16232\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/16233"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=16232"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=16232"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=16232"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}