Supreme Court to review 1968 Wharton graduate Donald Trump's presidential immunity claim

The Supreme Court announced that it will hear a case pertaining to whether 1968 Wharton graduate and former President Donald Trump is immune from prosecution for charges pertaining to his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. 

The court's announcement on Wednesday follows a unanimous ruling by a D.C. Circuit Court panel three weeks earlier, which rejected Trump's claim that the former presidency shields him from criminal prosecution for actions taken in office. The Supreme Court, which agreed to expedite the case, said that it will hear arguments pertaining to Trump's immunity claim on the week of April 22. 

The proceedings will further delay the federal trial charging Trump with allegedly conspiring to overturn the results of the 2020 election. While United States District Judge Tanya Chutkan originally set a trial date for March 4, the date is likely to be delayed until the middle of the 2024 election campaign, or potentially after the election itself.

On Feb. 6, a three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit concluded that — even if Trump was protected by immunity while serving as president — he is no longer immune to criminal charges. 

"Former President Trump has become citizen Trump, with all of the defenses of any other criminal defendant,” the panel wrote in the ruling. 

In response to the decision, Trump submitted an emergency application asking the justices to prevent a D.C. Circuit court ruling from going through. On Feb. 13, the Supreme Court gave Jack Smith — the special counsel member responsible for prosecuting the federal case — a week to respond to Trump's application. 

Smith urged the court to deny Trump's application for a stay and for the Supreme Court to review the case, thereby allowing Trump's trial to proceed — saying that the former president does not meet the qualifications to halt court proceedings. The decision by the Supreme Court on Wednesday effectively pauses the case from moving forward until issues regarding ex-presidential immunity are fully resolved. 

Had the court decided to reject Trump’s appeals and allow the District court to proceed with their trial as scheduled, a conclusion before the Nov. 5 election would have been much more plausible. Now, the fate of Trump’s legal issues lies with the nine justices of the Supreme Court. 

In a February legal filing, Smith said that if the Supreme Court upholds Trump's argument for presidential immunity, the decision would “upend understandings about Presidential accountability that have prevailed throughout history while undermining democracy and the rule of law.”

A favorable ruling for Trump would be beneficial for both this specific case and the numerous other legal challenges he has been facing since departing from office. Full presidential immunity would likely undermine many of these charges or further delay trial dates. 

Earlier this month, Trump was involved in a separate trial questioning his eligibility to run for president under the 14th Amendment’s insurrection clause for his role in the riot at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.