Special prosecutor Jack Smith had pleaded with Supreme Court justices to quickly decide whether Donald Trump enjoys immunity for his attempts to subvert the 2020 presidential election result and for his role in the events that led to the assault. to the Capitol on January 6, 2021, when he was still president. This Friday, the high court refused to do so, as Trump's lawyers wanted (and requested) this week. This decision can be interpreted as a victory for the tycoon's defense.
In an unusual move, Smith wanted the process to skip the appeals court step and go directly to the Supreme Court in order to meet the deadline they had given themselves for the trial being followed against Trump in Washington for his role after lose at the polls in a legitimate way to Joe Biden. Following the news this Friday, it is very unlikely that it will be held on March 4, as planned.
The 81-page document of the special prosecutor Smith said: “This case presents a fundamental question at the heart of our democracy: whether a former president has absolute immunity from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office or whether [por el contrario] It is constitutionally protected. (…) USA [a quien Smith representa] recognizes that this is an extraordinary request. But this is an extraordinary case.”
Trump had unsuccessfully defended this “absolute immunity” before the federal judge investigating his case in Washington, Tanya S. Chutkan, who flatly refused to file the case. “The text, structure and history of the Constitution do not support that argument. No court, nor any other power of the State, has ever accepted it. And this court will not do it. Whatever immunities a sitting president may enjoy, the United States only has one chief executive at a time, and that position does not confer a lifetime of safe conduct to avoid jail,” Chutkan noted in her resolution.
When his lawyers went to the Supreme Court to convince its nine justices, six conservatives and three progressives, three of whom were appointed during the time of the Republican magnate in the White House, they accused Smith of confusing the public interest with the “partisan interest of ensure that President Trump will be subjected to a month-long criminal trial in the midst of the presidential campaign in which he is the main candidate and the only serious opponent [a Biden]”.
The date of March 4 was especially symbolic in a year that Trump will go from the rally to the courthouse. The next day, Super Tuesday is celebrated, the key day of the primaries in which a greater number of delegates are chosen for the designation of the presidential candidate at the Republican convention. The tycoon comfortably leads all the polls.
Join EL PAÍS to follow all the news and read without limits.
Subscribe
There is another trial scheduled for March, that of his first accusation, for commercial falsehoods in payments to hide scandals that he feared would ruin his 2016 presidential campaign (one of them to the porn actress Stormy Daniels, to silence an alleged affair extramarital). This is scheduled before a New York State court, for five weeks beginning March 25, 2024.
Then the criminal case would come for crimes against the espionage law and obstruction of justice for illegally retaining classified material in his possession after his departure from the White House. The judge for the Southern District of Florida has scheduled a five-week trial from May 20, 2024, although it is also likely to be delayed. And she is awaiting a trial date in Georgia for the attempted electoral theft in that State.
Subscribe here to newsletter from EL PAÍS América and receive all the key information on current events in the region
#Supreme #Court #victory #Trump #urgently #decide #immunity