Supreme Court Denies Jack Smith's Urgent Petition on Trump Immunity Dispute

The Supreme Court rejected special counsel Jack Smith's request to expedite arguments on whether Donald Trump has immunity from federal prosecution for alleged crimes committed while in office, potentially delaying his trial. The court did not provide an explanation for its decision and there were no dissenting opinions.

Former President Donald Trump greets supporters as he arrives at a commit to caucus rally, Tuesday, Dec. 19, 2023, in Waterloo, Iowa. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)

Charlie Neibergall/AP

Detroit News: Trump recorded pressuring Michigan canvassers not to certify 2020 vote

Smith suffered a significant setback when he attempted to expedite the handling of a key issue in his election subversion case against Trump, skipping the usual federal appeals court process. The decision is seen as a win for Trump, as it aligns with his strategy to delay the criminal case and prolong the legal battle over the immunity question before proceeding to trial. Both parties still have the option to appeal to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals and ultimately the high court.

The issue is already under expedited review at the DC Circuit, with oral arguments set for January 9. The trial for election subversion is scheduled to begin in March. Trump's attorneys are urging the court not to take the case, arguing that the special counsel is making hasty decisions without proper consideration.

In court papers, Trump's attorneys emphasized the need for caution, rather than rush, given the political nature of the case. Earlier this month, they requested the appeals court to review the immunity ruling made by District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is presiding over his criminal case.

Chutkan dismissed the argument from Trump's attorneys that the criminal indictment should be dismissed because he was working to "ensure election integrity" as part of his official capacity as president when he allegedly undermined the 2020 election results, and therefore is protected under presidential immunity. All procedural deadlines in the case have been paused while the appeal plays out.

Meanwhile, Smith's team attempted to bypass the appeals court's review of the matter by having the justices step in now.

The petition from Smith's team to the Supreme Court emphasizes the critical public importance of resolving the respondents' claims of immunity and proceeding promptly with the trial if the immunity claim is rejected. Smith cited a precedent from the Watergate era, in which the Supreme Court expedited a case and ultimately rejected then-President Richard Nixon's claims of presidential privilege in a subpoena dispute over Oval Office tapes.

The stakes here are as high, if not higher. The resolution of the question presented is crucial to determining whether the former President will stand trial, which is set to begin in less than three months, the special counsel stated in court documents. Smith also vehemently opposed Trump's assertion that prosecutors were unfairly trying to rush him to trial in March, stating that these claims are baseless and inaccurate.

Additionally, prosecutors requested the court to determine if Trump is shielded by double jeopardy. Trump's defense attorneys have argued that, because he was acquitted by the Senate during his impeachment trial, he cannot be criminally prosecuted for the same alleged offenses.

This story has been updated with additional details.