Judges Doubt Trump’s Eligibility for Prosecution Immunity
TL/DR –
A three-judge panel, which includes two appointees of President Joe Biden, is questioning if they have jurisdiction to consider President Trump’s appeal for immunity from prosecution for his actions while in office. These allegations, if tried, could implicate Trump in crimes related to his actions related to the 2020 election. The case also has wider implications for the issue of a former president’s immunity from prosecution for actions taken in office and could potentially set the stage for further appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Trump’s Prosecution Immunity Doubtful, Judges Indicate
A three-judge panel, two appointed by President Biden, expressed doubts about their jurisdiction over former President Trump’s appeal for immunity from prosecution and hinted at potential procedural dismissal.
Trump’s attorney was pressed by the judges to justify claims that Trump’s actions, deemed within his official presidential duties, should protect him from criminal charges. This argument was previously dismissed by a lower-court judge, casting further doubt on immunity for ex-presidents post-office. Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson declared, “I think it’s paradoxical to say that his constitutional duty to take care allows him to violate criminal law.”
Implications of Appeal
The appeal’s outcome could significantly impact the ongoing case against Trump and set precedence for prosecuting ex-presidents. In addition, it could prompt further appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The case’s prompt resolution is vital to Special Counsel Jack Smith and his team who aim to proceed with the delayed trial before the November election. Trump’s legal team seeks case dismissal and a lengthy appeals process to extend the trial beyond its start date of March 4, which could push it past the election.
Trump’s attendance at Tuesday’s proceedings emphasized the case’s importance. Despite defendants not being required to attend such hearings, Trump made an appearance.
Trump’s legal team asserts that courts cannot scrutinize a president’s official actions, arguing that their client’s prosecution threatens American history and opens doors to politically motivated cases.
However, judges Henderson and Florence Pan pointed out that Trump could potentially face criminal prosecution. They questioned why former President Richard Nixon needed a pardon after the Watergate scandal if ex-presidents are immune from prosecution.
Smith’s team argues against absolute immunity and contends that Trump’s alleged actions, such as recruiting false electors in battleground states won by Biden and pressuring Vice President Mike Pence to reject counting electoral votes, fall outside a president’s official duties.
A timeline for a ruling by the panel from the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals remains uncertain. Smith’s team aims to maintain the case schedule, while Trump’s strategy appears to be postponing the trial until after the November election.
—
Read More US Political News