Supreme court to issue Trump immunity decision
Good morning US politics readers. Today marks the final day of the supreme court term, with justices expected to issue its long-anticipated decision on Donald Trump’s presidential immunity claim.
The former president’s case is one of four rulings yet to be decided and certainly the one of greatest consequences. In Donald Trump v the United States, he is seeking absolute immunity from criminal prosecution over his attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election and his role in the January 6 Capitol Hill insurrection.
The court has three other cases remaining on the docket, including two cases over social media laws in Texas and Florida that could limit how platforms regulate posted content. The rulings will be issued one by one, starting at 10am eastern time.
Here’s what else we’re following:
-
Joe Biden is at Camp David today and will return to the White House tonight. The president’s family gathered on Sunday to urge him to stay in the race after a disastrous debate performance last week.
-
Steve Bannon, Trump’s longtime ally, is set to turn himself in to prison in Connecticut after the supreme court rejected his last-minute appeal to avoid prison time.
Key events
The supreme court has issued its first decision of the day, in the case of Corner Post Inc v Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
The case is about when the statute of limitations clock begins to accrue for challenges to government regulations under the Administrative Procedure Act.
In a 6-3 decision, the court holds that a claim under the Administrative Procedure Act to challenge an agency action first comes into being when the plaintiff is injured by final agency action.
Besides the Trump immunity case, the supreme court has yet to release decisions on three other cases.
In two separate cases, Moody v NetChoice and NetChoice v Paxton, the court is weighing the constitutionality of laws in Texas and Florida regulating social media platforms. Both cases deal with how social media platforms moderate content and could have broad implications for freedom of speech online.
Filed by NetChoice, an association representing the world’s largest social media firms, both cases challenge state laws blocking social media platforms from moderating certain user content or banning users.
The court heard arguments in both cases in February. Here’s what to know about those two cases.
Hugo Lowell
The big question today with the Trump immunity decision as we wait for the ruling: will the supreme court allow the special counsel to use “official” acts that might be struck from the indictment as contextual evidence for a jury at trial?
If the supreme court allows the trial judge to instruct jurors to consider Donald Trump’s official acts as a guide, just to add to their understanding of Trump’s motives, it may do no meaningful damage to the prosecution’s case in chief.
This issue was raised at oral argument when Michael Dreeben, arguing for the special counsel, drew parallels with speech that is protected by the first amendment but is part of a criminal case. People can’t be charged for speech, but it can be introduced as evidence for motive.
What would be the fallout if the supreme court granted Trump presidential immunity?
Maya Yang
With four more cases to be decided, the supreme court is planned to issue its decision on Donald Trump’s presidential immunity claim on Monday.
The case, which was presented before the conservative-majority supreme court on 25 April, was the last that was argued this term. According to critics, the supreme court’s decision to hold on to this case until early July while having issued decisions on other major cases in recent weeks is “intentional”.
“The delay that has occurred here is intentional, and it is destructive of our democratic process,” James Sample, a constitutional law professor at Hofstra University, told Salon.
Echoing similar sentiments, Laurence Tribe, a constitutional law professor emeritus at Harvard University, told Salon:
It’s obvious that the court has deliberately delayed everything … It could easily have issued a ruling much sooner … It could have taken the case in December when the special counsel asked it to be heard directly, or they could have declined to take the case after the court of appeals quite comprehensively rejected Trump’s appeal, so the trial could be over by now.
Regardless of what the supreme court’s decision on the case is, its handling of the case’s timeline has significantly decreased the chances of Trump standing trial before the 2024 presidential elections in November.
The supreme court’s decision on Donald Trump’s immunity case could be “one of the most important decisions in American history” for presidential power, Politico Playbook writes.
The smart money going into today is on Trump at least partially losing – but the court can be unpredictable, and a narrow ruling could delay Trump’s trial past the election (or forever if he wins).
The timing of the supreme court’s ruling on the Trump immunity case has come under fierce criticism. According to critics, the decision to hold on to this case until early July while having issued decisions on other major cases in recent weeks is “intentional”.
Regardless of what the court’s decision on the case is, by holding on to the case until early July, the justices have reduced, if not eliminated, the chances of Donald Trump standing trial before the 2024 presidential elections in November.
Across all four of his criminal cases, Trump has been trying to delay the trials’ start dates. Thus far, he has only been convicted in one of his cases, which involved hush-money payments to adult film actor Stormy Daniels in attempts to influence the 2016 presidential election.
In Donald Trump v the United States, the supreme court will decide whether the former president will stand trial for his attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election and his role in the January 6 Capitol Hill insurrection.
According to Trump, who has been indicted by the justice department’s special counsel Jack Smith on four counts related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election, presidents should be immune from federal prosecution.
The case was presented before the conservative-majority supreme court on 25 April, during which justices heard roughly three hours of oral arguments.
The court did not seem inclined to grant total immunity to Trump, but a majority of the justices suggested there should be some level of protection, and expressed an interest in having a lower court decide whether the indictment included “official” acts that could be expunged.
Here are the key takeaways from the Trump immunity case.
Supreme court to issue Trump immunity decision
Good morning US politics readers. Today marks the final day of the supreme court term, with justices expected to issue its long-anticipated decision on Donald Trump’s presidential immunity claim.
The former president’s case is one of four rulings yet to be decided and certainly the one of greatest consequences. In Donald Trump v the United States, he is seeking absolute immunity from criminal prosecution over his attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election and his role in the January 6 Capitol Hill insurrection.
The court has three other cases remaining on the docket, including two cases over social media laws in Texas and Florida that could limit how platforms regulate posted content. The rulings will be issued one by one, starting at 10am eastern time.
Here’s what else we’re following:
-
Joe Biden is at Camp David today and will return to the White House tonight. The president’s family gathered on Sunday to urge him to stay in the race after a disastrous debate performance last week.
-
Steve Bannon, Trump’s longtime ally, is set to turn himself in to prison in Connecticut after the supreme court rejected his last-minute appeal to avoid prison time.