Supreme Court hears high-stakes arguments on Trump’s absolute immunity in criminal case: Live updates
Whether or not a president has immunity from criminal prosecution is at the Supreme Court this morning thanks to Donald Trump.
In a case brought by the former president, Mr Trump is asking the nine justices on the court to determine if he is protected from criminal prosecution based on the indictment brought against him by Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith regarding his attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
Mr Trump’s lawyers argue that he is immune from the four criminal charges based on the Supreme Court case Nixon v Fitzgerald which determined that presidents are protected from civil lawsuits.
But Mr Smith says different, citing United States v Nixon, a ruling that found presidents are not immune from the criminal judicial process.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court will decide in the case that’s set to be a landmark ruling.
Mr Trump will not be in attendance to witness the hearing as he is required to be in New York for the latest installment of his hush money trial.
Key Points
What to know about Donald Trump’s ‘presidential immunity' battle
The Trump prosecution at the heart of Thursday’s Supreme Court hearing
Why the ghosts of the Nixon administration will hover over Trump’s hearing
Watch: Trump pushes for presidential immunity in six-minute video rant
13:00 , Joe Sommerlad
Why does Donald Trump think he deserves immunity from prosecution, a protection not required by any of his 44 predecessors in the Oval Office?
Here are some of the former president’s central arguments.
How The Independent has covered the Trump immunity saga: Part 2
11:00 , Joe Sommerlad
Next up, here’s Alex Woodward’s report from 9 January when a three-justice DC federal appeals court prepared to hear legal arguments from Trump’s lawyers on the immunity question.
They went on to uphold Judge Tanya Chutkan’s original decision rejecting the defence, which led Trump to elevate his appeal, again, to the Supreme Court, bringing us to today’s hearing.
Trump’s ‘immunity’ defence takes centre stage in election conspiracy case
How The Independent has covered the Trump immunity saga: Part 1
10:00 , Joe Sommerlad
It’s been a long road on the way to the upcoming Supreme Court arguments over the scope of Donald Trump’s presidential immunity.
Here are some of the key developments, as reported by The Independent.
First up, here’s the moment Jack Smith announced his indictment on 1 August last year, the third of four criminal cases brought against Trump.
Watch moment Trump indictment announced by Special Counsel Jack Smith
How Supreme Court delays gave Trump what he wants before 2024 elections
05:53 , Josh Marcus
On 1 August, 2023, Donald Trump was federally indicted for his failed efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.
Two months later, his attorneys argued that the charges should be tossed out, citing his presidential “immunity” from prosecution for crimes allegedly committed while he was in office.
A growing body of legal experts and constitutional scholars have repeatedly warned that the defence is absurd, far-reaching, and dangerous to democracy.
By December, federal prosecutors were asking the US Supreme Court to step in and settle the question once and for all, hoping to keep the case moving swiftly to prevent the possibility of a criminal trial against president-elect Trump – or the potential for a President Trump to find a way to throw out the case altogether if he is sworn back into office in 2025.
Alex Woodward reports.
How Supreme Court delays gave Trump what he wants before 2024 elections
Supreme Court weighs Trump’s ‘presidential immunity’ claim. Here’s what that means
01:53 , Josh Marcus
Whether or not Donald Trump, and future presidents, are immune from criminal prosecution for actions conducted while in the White House will soon be decided by the Supreme Court.
In what is setting up to be a landmark ruling from the nation’s highest court, the nine justices will determine if Mr Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election results by making false claims of election fraud, allegedly trying to install fake electors and pressuring former vice president Mike Pence to decertify election results were part of his “official acts” as president, and if those are protected from criminal prosecution.
Mr Trump claims he should enjoy absolute immunity, citing previous court cases that have determined presidents have immunity from civil lawsuits brought against them for conduct that occurred while in office.
But special counsel Jack Smith, who brought the four-count federal indictment against Mr Trump, says differently, citing precedent that has determined presidents do not have immunity from criminal judicial proceedings.
Ariana Baio reports.
Supreme Court weighs Trump’s ‘presidential immunity’ claim. Here’s what that means
The Trump prosecution at the heart of Thursday’s Supreme Court hearing
Thursday 25 April 2024 00:27 , Josh Marcus
Thursday’s Supreme Court arguments were spurred on by a case filed last year against Donald Trump by federal officials, accusing him of trying to overturn the 2020 election.
At the time, Alex Woodward had this analysis on what the charges mean.
Eight key revelations from Trump’s January 6 indictment
What to know about Donald Trump’s immunity battle
Wednesday 24 April 2024 23:27 , Josh Marcus
The Supreme Court on Thursday will hear arguments about whether presidential immunity privileges protect Donald Trump from the special counsel case against him for trying to overturn the 2020 election result.
Here’s what you need to know:
Why does this case matter?
Thursday’s arguments deal with a highly complicated area of the law: how much a president is protected from prosecution based on things they did in office.
It’s a complicated balance the Supreme Court has wrestled with for years, particularly when it comes to scandal-plagued presidents.
The high court has recognised both that the commander-in-chief can’t be sued for every single thing that happens when they’re in the White House, but the panel has also found that presidents can’t avoid the judicial process entirely just because of their position.
As a result of this history, both sides in Thursday’s arguments are actually reaching back to precedent from the Nixon era to make their opposing points about the scope of presidential immunity.
More than just an important legal question, the position the justices take will impact whether Donald Trump faces criminal charges for his conduct during the final, chaotic moments of the 2020 election.
What’s the underlying prosecution that inspired this case?
In August of last year, special counsel Jack Smith charged Donald Trump with four federal criminal counts in Washington, DC, related to the former president’s alleged scheme to overthrow the 2020 election.
Mr Trump has pleaded not guilty to the charges and has sought to throw out the case, arguing that his conduct during the 2020 election is immune to prosecution because of its connection to his duties as president.
In February, the US Supreme Court agreed to take up the immunity question, after a series of lower appeals courts rejected the former president’s arguments.
What comes next?
That’s anyone’s guess, but the high court’s decision could drastically impact the special counsel case.
Even if Mr Trump is not able to dismiss the federal case altogether, the Supreme Court’s decision could result in further rounds of argument and hearings in other courts, postponing a potential high-profile trial until after the upcoming presidential election in November.
Donald Trump’s ‘presidential immunity’ argument finally reaches Supreme Court
Wednesday 24 April 2024 22:44 , Josh Marcus
Hello and welcome to our live coverage of Donald Trump’s upcoming Supreme Court hearing regarding the scope of his immunity from prosecution.
The arguments could determine the future of special counsel Jack Smith’s case against the former president — and maybe the fate of the 2024 election itself.
