(UnitedVoice.com) – Special Counsel Jack Smith indicted Donald Trump earlier this year on several felony counts for his alleged efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. Trump’s lawyers have argued he enjoyed immunity for his actions while executing his duties as President of the United States.
Smith filed court documents asking the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) to weigh in on Trump’s claims that presidential immunity and the Fifth Amendment’s Double Jeopardy Clause barred his prosecution.
SCOTUS recently turned down Smith’s request.
SCOTUS Shoots Down Smith’s Trump Case Petition
On December 22, SCOTUS issued an unsigned order denying Smith’s certiorari request. The one-sentence document didn’t provide any additional details regarding the Court’s decision, nor did it note any dissents.
US District Judge Tanya Chutkan previously rejected Trump’s arguments in a December 1 ruling. His legal team filed an appeal with the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, and it scheduled the case for oral arguments on January 9.
Meanwhile, on December 11, Smith filed a petition for a writ of certiorari, asking the US Supreme Court to bypass the DC Circuit Court and decide whether Trump’s immunity claims had legal merit. “Given the […] consequential character of the […] questions at stake,” he wrote, “only this court can provide the […] final resolution” to Trump’s arguments against the legality of being tried.
SCOTUS Decision a Possible Game Changer for Trump
Court watchers and legal experts claim that Smith petitioned SCOTUS as part of an ongoing effort to prosecute Trump before the 2024 presidential election. However, a long-standing Justice Department policy bars federal prosecutors from politicizing their decisions to indict and try individuals. So, he couldn’t advise the nation’s highest court of his true intentions, paving the way for the justices’ adverse ruling.
On the other hand, Trump isn’t bound by any precedent, nor does he seem keen on maintaining political norms. For now, his legal team’s primary strategy appears to be delaying any criminal proceedings until after the conclusion of next year’s election.
Current polling figures reveal the wisdom of that decision. For instance, a recent New York Times/Siena College survey showed that nearly one-quarter of Trump’s current supporters said they wouldn’t support Trump’s nomination if a jury convicted the former president in Smith’s election interference case.
Likewise, a Reuters/Ipsos poll released earlier this summer showed that nearly half of the registered Republicans surveyed said that they wouldn’t vote for Trump in the general election if he were convicted of a felony.
While it remains unclear whether SCOTUS’ recent ruling will push Smith’s prosecution beyond next year’s election, it likely guarantees his trial in the DC case will be delayed beyond its current scheduled start in March.
Copyright 2023, UnitedVoice.com
