Former President Donald Trump appeared in New York State Supreme Court in Lower Manhattan on October 3 for the second day of his civil fraud trial.Dave Sanders/New York Times News Service
Lawyers for former President Donald Trump asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday to recuse themselves from a fight over whether he can be prosecuted on charges that he plotted to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
Last week, Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team asked the country’s high court to quickly consider Trump’s claim that he enjoys immunity from prosecution as a former president. The unusual request for a speedy verdict prevents delays that could postpone the trial of the 2024 Republican presidential primary front-runner, currently scheduled to begin March 4, until after next year’s presidential election. It seems that there is a purpose.
But Trump’s lawyers told the Supreme Court there was no reason to take up the issue now, especially since a lower appellate court in Washington has already considered the same issue and is scheduled to hear arguments on January 9. , he said.
“Importance does not automatically require speed. In fact, the opposite is usually the case. President Trump’s lawyers have faced novel, complex and sensitive issues, such as the existence of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for acts of official conduct. “Historical issues require not only careful deliberation, but even more careful deliberation.”
As Mr. Trump faces four criminal cases and 91 felonies as he seeks to retake the White House, a core part of his national defense strategy is to prevent prosecutors from interfering with presidential candidates, including after the election. It’s about delaying prosecution. In asking the Supreme Court to postpone consideration of the immunity issue, lawyers are trying to avoid a quick and definitive answer that could send the case to trial early next year.
“This complaint raises serious and historic questions. The president’s erroneous denial of his claim to immunity from prosecution certainly warrants a review by this court,” the lawyers wrote. is writing. But that doesn’t mean the court “should file a lawsuit before lower court review is complete,” they added.
He also said the special prosecutor’s desire to bring the case to trial quickly makes it appear as if it is politically motivated. “This is to ensure that President Trump, the leading Republican presidential candidate and the biggest electoral threat to President Biden, has a months-long fight.”The lengthy criminal trial comes at the height of his presidential campaign. Ta. ”
Another question before the court is Mr. Trump’s argument, which Mr. Chutkan has already rejected, that he cannot be prosecuted in court for conduct for which Congress has already impeached him and later acquitted him. .
The Supreme Court has indicated it will decide quickly whether to hear the case, but has not announced what it will ultimately do.
At issue is President Trump’s claim that he is entitled to immunity for acts he commits as part of his official duties as president. Tanya Chutkan, the U.S. district judge overseeing the case, rejected that argument earlier this month.
Mr. Trump’s team then appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, but Mr. Smith took the unusual step of trying to circumvent the appeals court (the usual next step in the process) and took the issue to the Supreme Court. I requested that it be addressed directly.
“The United States recognizes that this is an unusual request. This is an unusual case,” prosecutors wrote, asking the Supreme Court to intervene.
“There is no question that the president’s claim of immunity from criminal prosecution has been erroneously denied and deserves review by this court,” Trump’s lawyers acknowledged in a brief.
The Supreme Court is expected to soon be asked to consider another Trump case with significant political implications. Mr. Trump’s lawyers vowed to appeal to the high court Tuesday’s ruling that excluded him from Colorado’s ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution prohibits anyone who takes an oath to support the Constitution and then “engages in rebellion” against the Constitution from holding public office. .
