WASHINGTON (AP) 鈥 Former President Donald Trump is asking the Supreme Court to extend the delay in his election interference trial, saying he is immune from prosecution on charges he plotted to overturn his 2020 election loss.
His lawyers filed an emergency appeal with the court on Monday, just four days after the justices heard Trump鈥檚 separate despite attempts to kick him off because of his efforts following his election loss in 2020.
鈥淲ithout immunity from criminal prosecution, the Presidency as we know it will cease to exist,鈥 Trump's lawyers wrote, repeating arguments that have so far failed in federal courts.
The filing keeps on hold what would be a landmark criminal trial of a former president while the nation鈥檚 highest court decides what to do. It met a deadline to ask the justices to intervene that the federal appeals court in Washington set when it rejected Trump鈥檚 immunity claims and ruled the trial could proceed.
The Supreme Court鈥檚 decision on what to do, and how quickly it acts, could determine whether the Republican presidential primary frontrunner stands trial in the case before the November election.
There is no timetable for the court to act, but team has strongly pushed for the trial to take place this year. Trump, meanwhile, has repeatedly sought to delay the case. If Trump were to defeat President Joe Biden, he could potentially try to use his position as head of the executive branch to order a new attorney general to dismiss the federal cases he faces or even seek a pardon for himself.
The Supreme Court鈥檚 options include rejecting the emergency appeal, which would enable to restart the trial proceedings in Washington's federal court. The trial was initially scheduled to begin in early March.
The court also could extend the delay while it hears arguments on the immunity issue. In that event, the schedule the justices set could determine how soon a trial might begin, if indeed they agree with lower court rulings that Trump is not immune from prosecution.
In December, Smith and his team had urged the justices to take up and decide the immunity issue, even before the appeals court weighed in. 鈥淚t is of imperative public importance that Respondent鈥檚 claim of immunity be resolved by this Court and that Respondent鈥檚 trial proceed as promptly as possible if his claim of immunity is rejected,鈥 prosecutors wrote in December.
Trump's legal team has ascribed partisan motives to the prosecution's push for a prompt trial. 鈥淐onducting a months-long criminal trial of President Trump at the height of election season will radically disrupt President Trump鈥檚 ability to campaign against President Biden 鈥 which appears to be the whole point of the Special Counsel鈥檚 persistent demands for expedition,鈥 the former president's lawyers wrote.
Courts should not rush into a trial because the subject of presidential immunity from criminal charges is 鈥渁 novel, complex, and momentous question that warrants careful consideration on appeal,鈥 the legal team led by D. John Sauer wrote.
In their request to keep the trial on hold, Trump's lawyers indicated they would seek to stretch out the delay by also asking the full federal appeals court in Washington to weigh in. Only after that would they file a formal appeal to the Supreme Court, the lawyers wrote. That could add weeks, if not months, before trial preparations could restart.
Now it's up to a court on which three justices, Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, were appointed by Trump when he was president. They have moved the court to the right in major decisions that , and in college admissions.
But the Supreme Court hasn't been especially friendly to Trump on legal matters directly concerning the former president. The court declined to take up several appeals filed by Trump and his allies related to the 2020 election. It also refused to prevent tax files and other documents from being turned over to congressional committees and prosecutors in New York.
Last week, however, the justices did seem likely to end the efforts to prevent Trump from being on the 2024 ballot. A decision in that case could come any time.
The Supreme Court has previously held that presidents are immune from civil liability for official acts, and Trump鈥檚 lawyers have for months argued that that protection should be extended to as well.
Last week, a unanimous panel of two judges appointed by President Joe Biden and one by a Republican president sharply rejected Trump鈥檚 novel claim that former presidents enjoy absolute immunity for actions that fall within their official job duties. It was the held that Trump can be prosecuted for actions undertaken while in the White House and in the run-up to Jan. 6, 2021, when stormed the U.S. Capitol.
The case was argued before Judges Florence Pan and J. Michelle Childs, appointees of Biden, a Democrat, and Karen LeCraft Henderson, who was named to the bench by President George H.W. Bush, a Republican.
The case in Washington is one of Trump faces as he seeks to reclaim the White House. He faces federal charges in Florida that he illegally retained classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate, a case that was also brought by Smith and is set for trial in May.
He鈥檚 also charged in state court in Georgia with scheming to subvert that state鈥檚 2020 election and in New York in connection with hush money payments made to porn actor Stormy Daniels. He has denied any wrongdoing.
