Donald Trump's attorneys have until 4 p.m. EST on Wednesday to explain why the Supreme Court should not decide whether he has presidential immunity from his Washington, D.C., election fraud trial.
Chief Prosecutor Jack Smith asked the Supreme Court on December 10 to decide whether Trump can claim presidential immunity, thereby bypassing the months of appeals that Trump has planned in the case.
Trump has been indicted on four counts related to allegedly attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 election in the run-up to the January 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol, including 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. It is one of four criminal cases that Trump is facing while he campaigns as frontrunner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination. He has pleaded not guilty in all of his cases.
"The United States recognizes that this is an extraordinary request. This is an extraordinary case," Smith wrote in his brief. His request was heavily criticized by Trump's lawyers at the time.
The Supreme Court said the following day, December 11, that it would "expedite consideration of the petition" and gave Trump until 4 p.m. EST on December 20 to file a response to Smith's request. That deadline for Trump's lawyers is two days longer than Smith had requested.
It does not mean the court will take up the case, only that it will consider the request as quickly as it can. However, the court's rapid response to Smith, made just hours after his late-night request on Sunday, signals that it will likely hear the case after hearing from Trump's lawyers.
If Trump loses the Supreme Court case, that would negate his appeals to the Washington, D.C. Court of Appeals and force him to go on trial without immunity.
Newsweek reached out to Trump's attorney via email for comment.
"The question is whether they will proceed in the normal course to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia or whether the Supreme Court will hear the appeal immediately, at Smith's request," former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance wrote on her blog, Civil Discourse, on Monday.
Vance wrote that a Supreme Court decision "would save a lot of time as the losing party is certain to appeal to the Supreme Court in any event."
"Trump owes the Supreme Court a response to Smith's request for a writ of certiorari before judgment on Wednesday. The Court isn't considering the merits of Trump's motions to dismiss yet; these arguments are about whether they should hear the appeal at all at this point," she added.
Tanya Chutkan, the Washington, D.C. judge overseeing Trump's election case, agreed to the former president's request to halt the trial while the Supreme Court is deciding whether to hear the case. If it refuses, Trump can proceed to the court of appeals as he had intended.
Uncommon Knowledge
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
fairness meter
To Rate This Article
About the writer
Sean O'Driscoll is a Newsweek Senior Crime and Courts Reporter based in Ireland. His focus is reporting on U.S. law. ... Read more
