Supreme Court Weighs Former President Trump’s Immunity from Prosecution for Election Interference

The Supreme Court heard arguments regarding former President Donald Trump’s immunity from prosecution in a case charging him with plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. This decision could have far-reaching implications, as it would determine whether ex-presidents can be charged for official acts committed during their time in office. The hearing lasted more than double its allotted time and Justice Department policy prohibits indicting a sitting president but not former ones. Chief Justice John Roberts was among at least five justices who appeared likely to reject the claim of absolute immunity, while Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh suggested that lower courts might have to decide if Trump should have any level of immunity during such a prosecution process. The case has already been reviewed by two sets of judges in the past six months, with both rejecting claims of absolute immunity for former presidents. If the Supreme Court rules against Trump and in favor of the government, the trial would return to U.S District Judge Tanya Chutkan’s court once preparedness measures are met; if successful again during an election campaign or as a future president, he could potentially dismiss charges via his attorney general, secure self-pardons for himself or face new allegations should a Democrat win the presidency in November 2024. The delay of this case is also significant since Trump has been pushing to postpone it until after the upcoming election.