{"id":2286581,"date":"2024-07-01T03:11:15","date_gmt":"2024-07-01T07:11:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/high-stakes-supreme-court-ruling-on-trump-immunity-due-monday-washington-examiner\/"},"modified":"2024-07-01T03:14:56","modified_gmt":"2024-07-01T07:14:56","slug":"high-stakes-supreme-court-ruling-on-trump-immunity-due-monday-washington-examiner","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/high-stakes-supreme-court-ruling-on-trump-immunity-due-monday-washington-examiner\/","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court to rule on Trump immunity Monday, reports Washington Examiner"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">22<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Fhigh-stakes-supreme-court-ruling-on-trump-immunity-due-monday-washington-examiner%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2286581&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><p>The U.S. Supreme\u2063 of Court is deliberating on whether former President \u200dDonald \u2062Trump\u200d has immunity from prosecution\u2063 regarding\u200c charges that allege he attempted to overturn the \u200b2020 election results. \u200cLegal experts anticipate\u200b that the court may not grant complete immunity and could return the case\u200b to a lower court to determine if Trump&#8217;s\u2062 actions were part of his official duties, which could be protected \u2063under presidential immunity, or private actions, which would not.<\/p>\n<p>The case has seen decisions\u2063 from lower courts against Trump\u2019s broad claim of \u200bimmunity.\u200c Lead justices, \u200bincluding Chief Justice\u2062 John Roberts and Justice Brett\u2063 Kavanaugh, have expressed skepticism towards\u200b Trump\u2019s arguments based \u2064on constitutional grounds and historical precedents. \u2062Justice Elena Kagan raised extreme\u200b hypotheticals to test the limits of Trump\u2019s assertion of presidential\u2062 immunity.<\/p>\n<p>Currently, the Supreme Court&#8217;s decision is\u200d pending\u2062 and could\u200c direct the \u200ccompletion\u200d of the \u200ctrial before or after the 2024 presidential election, depending \u200don whether it categorizes Trump\u2019s actions as official or \u200cprivate. This decision has \u2063major implications for Trump&#8217;s political future and the broader principle of presidential immunity post-office.  <\/p>\n<p class=\"readmore\">\n    <button onclick=\"showReadMore()\" id=\"readmorebtn\">Read more&#8230;<\/button>\n<\/p>\n<hr id=\"line\">\n<span id=\"more\"><\/p>\n<div>\n<p>The <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/supreme-court\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Supreme Court<\/a> is expected to rule Monday on <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/donald-trump\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Donald Trump<\/a>&lsquo;s claim that he is immune from criminal prosecution surrounding his four-count indictment on an alleged attempt to overturn the 2020 election.<\/p>\n<p>The <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/news\/3051399\/how-supreme-court-could-rule-trump-immunity\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">strongest possibility<\/a> that legal experts have suggested is that the case will be returned to a lower court, where a judge will wrestle over the facts of the case to determine which actions may be considered &ldquo;public&rdquo; conduct that is shielded by presidential immunity, and which acts constituted &ldquo;private&rdquo; conduct that may not be covered by immunity.<\/p>\n<figure><figcaption>Protesters demonstrate outside the Supreme Court as the justices hear arguments over whether&nbsp;Donald Trump is immune from prosecution in a case charging him with plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, April 25, 2024. (AP Photo\/J. Scott Applewhite)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>The case centers on whether Trump can challenge special counsel <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/jack-smith\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Jack Smith<\/a>&rsquo;s indictment for allegedly trying to subvert the 2020 election. Trump argues that former presidents should have full immunity for actions taken while in office and that a conviction should first require an impeachment, though the justices <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/news\/supreme-court\/2978885\/supreme-court-open-middle-ground-trump-immunity\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">did not sound poised to grant full immunity<\/a> based on their oral arguments in late April.<\/p>\n<h2><strong>Lower Court Decisions and Supreme Court Deliberations<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>Two lower courts have ruled against Trump&rsquo;s claim of broad immunity, which began with a ruling against Trump by U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, an appointee of former President Barack Obama who is assigned to his cause.<\/p>\n<p>However, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, two conservative justices who often vote together in consequential cases, suggested during April oral arguments that the U.S. Appeals Court for the District of Columbia Circuit may have erred in its approach.<\/p>\n<p>At one point in the hearing, Kavanaugh pushed back on the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/biden-debate-performance-renews-spotlight-on-hur-tapes-washington-examiner\/\" title=\"Biden debate performance renews spotlight on Hur tapes - Washington Examiner\">special counsel&#038;rsquo<\/a>;s position that there is no mention in the Constitution of immunity for former presidents.<\/p>\n<p>&ldquo;It&rsquo;s not explicit in the Constitution, but also executive privilege is not explicit in the&nbsp;<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/Constitution\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Constitution<\/a>,&rdquo; Kavanaugh said, referencing an established idea that presidents may withhold documents and information from the other branches of government.<\/p>\n<p>Justice Elena Kagan pushed Trump&rsquo;s attorney on just how far presidential immunity could extend, raising a hypothetical scenario of a military coup by a former president.<\/p>\n<p>&ldquo;How about if a president orders the&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/military\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">military<\/a>&nbsp;to stage a coup?&rdquo; Kagan asked.<\/p>\n<p>Former President&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/Richard-Nixon\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Richard Nixon<\/a>&nbsp;was a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/the-dearth-of-historical-fiction-is-a-disservice-to-curious-kids-everywhere\/\" title=\"Lack of historical fiction disappoints curious kids.\">key historical figure<\/a> that was leaned upon in the hearing. Trump in part rests his arguments on a 1982 Supreme Court decision that found former presidents are entitled to immunity from civil litigation for actions taken in office. Trump contends the same protection should apply to a former president for criminal charges as well, because the same concerns cited in the Nixon decision pertaining to &ldquo;functioning of government&rdquo; should apply.<\/p>\n<h2><strong>Potential Outcomes<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p><strong>&bull; Partial Immunity\/ Sending the Case Back To Trial Judge<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The Supreme Court might instruct lower courts to determine whether Trump&rsquo;s actions on January 6 were official or private before deciding on immunity. This could delay the trial, which Trump has aimed to push beyond the 2024 election.<\/p>\n<p>&bull; <strong>No Immunity<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The justices could conversely rule that Trump does not have any immunity from prosecution, allowing the trial to proceed as planned. This would align with <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/scotus-to-hear-appeal-over-ky-abortion-law\/\" title=\"SCOTUS to hear appeal over Ky. abortion law\">lower court rulings<\/a> that former presidents can face criminal charges for actions taken in office.<\/p>\n<h2><strong>Timing and Implications<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>The Supreme Court&rsquo;s decision to delay the ruling until July 1 has provided Trump with a temporary reprieve from seeing the case get to trial ahead of the 2024 presidential election. If the court sends the case back, it could delay the trial past the November 2024 election, aligning with Trump&rsquo;s strategy. However, if the court rules against him, the trial could proceed swiftly, impacting the election.<\/p>\n<p>Depending on the complexity of a potential public vs. private conduct test set by the court, Chutkan could get the case back on schedule ahead of the Nov. 5 election. However, legal experts have warned that the possible ambiguities of this test could result in another appeal by Trump or the prosecution if they contest the judge&rsquo;s interpretations.<\/p>\n<h2><strong>Broader Context<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>Trump pleaded not guilty in August to a four-count indictment related to election subversion.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>Meanwhile, a high court decision in <em><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/news\/supreme-court\/3041195\/supreme-court-rules-against-biden-doj-in-high-stakes-jan-6-case\/\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Fischer v. United States<\/a> <\/em>could affect whether Trump can still legally face two of the four charges pertaining to obstruction allegations.<\/p>\n<p>Roberts wrote in the majority opinion that the law should not be interpreted broadly but instead dependent on language in the overarching statute, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which passed in 2002 after the Enron scandal. The act specified that <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/what-happens-to-jan-6-cases-upended-by-supreme-court-ruling-washington-examiner\/\" title=\"What happens to Jan. 6 cases upended by Supreme Court ruling - Washington Examiner\">obstruction meant destroying<\/a> or manipulating documents that were part of an official proceeding.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/news\/3051399\/how-supreme-court-could-rule-trump-immunity\/\">Legal analysts<\/a> at Just Security conceded that Friday&rsquo;s decision dealt a &ldquo;soft blow&rdquo; to the government. They&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.justsecurity.org\/96493\/supreme-court-obstruction-january-6th\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">said<\/a>, however, that &ldquo;very few [Jan. 6] cases are likely to be materially affected&rdquo; and that Trump&rsquo;s case would be &ldquo;materially unaffected.&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>&ldquo;The upshot is that the decision means little in terms of the pending charges against former President Donald Trump,&rdquo; the analysts wrote, adding that the allegation Trump created &ldquo;false evidence&rdquo; in the election could be enough to satisfy the Supreme Court&rsquo;s scope of the obstruction charge.<\/p>\n<p><strong><a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/?d\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Special counsel Jack Smith has said as much in court papers, a sign that Smith would argue he correctly applied the obstruction charges if Trump were to challenge them.<\/p>\n<p><em>Ashley Oliver contributed to this report<\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Supreme Court is set to decide on Monday regarding Donald Trump&#8217;s assertion of immunity from prosecution related to his indictment for allegedly attempting to overturn the 2020 election. Legal experts predominantly believe the case will be sent back to a lower court for further review by a judge<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2633,"featured_media":2286582,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/AP24116448717067.webp","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[538],"tags":[5738,32275,3634,32076],"class_list":["post-2286581","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-washington-examiner","tag-immunity","tag-supreme-court","tag-trump","tag-washington-examiner"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/AP24116448717067.webp","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2286581","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2633"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2286581"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2286581\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2286582"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2286581"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2286581"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2286581"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}