As the Supreme Court prepares to rule on Trump’s immunity case, former President Donald Trump continues to argue his defense, saying Monday’s ruling will be “big” and “important.”
“This is a big decision. This is a big decision. This is a big decision. This is a decision that will affect the success or failure of our Nation for decades to come. We want a great Nation, not a weak, decaying and powerless Nation. Strong Executive Immunity is a Must!” Trump posted on his social media platforms on Sunday.
-Larry Ibsa, ABC News
While Trump’s team is focused on how the ruling will impact the events of January 6, they are also particularly interested in how it will affect other outstanding criminal cases.
Why?
Trump’s lawyers have filed a motion to dismiss the Florida documents lawsuit on the basis of executive immunity.
While the case is unlikely to be heard before the election, Judge Eileen Cannon, who is presiding over the case, has indicated she wants to wait for the Supreme Court’s decision before considering the motion, and given her unpredictable behavior, Trump’s legal team believes the ruling could give Judge Cannon another tool to cast doubt on the future of the case.
The best-case scenario for Trump’s legal team would be for the Supreme Court to rule that the president has immunity from prosecution for any acts he committed while in office, a scenario that seems unlikely, and the worst-case scenario would be for the Supreme Court to uphold lower court rulings that hold that criminal laws apply to former presidents just as they do to everyone else.
What do they expect? Neither side expects a total victory.
If the Supreme Court determines the order can take immediate effect, Trump’s legal team expects Judge Tanya Chutkan will likely move quickly in the Jan. 6 case and schedule briefings and status meetings sometime next week once the order is entered.
Litigation is also likely to be filed in Florida, and Judge Cannon may move to schedule briefings and in-person hearings on motions to dismiss.
-Catherine Faulders for ABC News
It came as a shock to many veteran court observers when Supreme Court justices sounded open to the idea of ​​granting some immunity to former presidents.
“It was surprising to hear from at least some of the justices that a president could commit crimes for which he would never be held accountable in court,” constitutional law expert Michael Gerhardt said. “I think that was just unthinkable to a lot of people before.”
One moment that stood out to Gerhardt was when Justice Elena Kagan pressed Trump lawyer John Sauer on whether a president could order the military to stage a coup and still be immune from liability. Sauer said that in their view, a president could.
“The answer she got was one of the most disturbing I’ve ever heard in the Supreme Court,” he said.
Read more about the reaction to the April debate here.
The Supreme Court heard historic arguments in April about whether former President Donald Trump can be criminally prosecuted in connection with his efforts to overturn his 2020 election defeat.
Trump has denied all wrongdoing and claims he should have “absolute immunity” for any “official acts” he committed while in office.
Read on for five lessons learned from this April’s discussions.
