(New York) Forcefully rejecting all of Donald Trump’s arguments, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that the former president is not entitled to immunity for the crimes he is accused of in Washington in connection with his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.
In a unanimous decision, the three judges called upon to decide in this case gave Donald Trump until Monday to appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, failing which the preliminary stages of his trial could resume in the federal capital .
“We cannot accept former President Trump’s assertion that a president has unlimited authority to commit crimes that would neutralize the most fundamental check of executive power – the recognition and implementation of election results” , wrote judges Michelle Childs, Florence Pan and Karen Henderson. “We also cannot endorse his apparent assertion that the executive branch has carte blanche to violate the rights of individual citizens to vote and have their votes counted. »
Does this mean that Trump’s trial in Washington will indeed take place before the 2024 presidential election?
Not necessarily. This trial, which was to open on March 4, has already been postponed to an indefinite date last Friday, due to this appeal that the former president has just lost. But the latter has not said his last word. He will exercise his right to appeal to the United States Supreme Court, said campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung, referring to an approach whose consequences are unpredictable.
He can also take a middle path by asking the full Washington appeals court to review the case. But, by taking this route, he could not prevent the preliminary stages of his trial from resuming their course. And the chances would be very slim that the entire appeals court would overturn the decision of the three-judge panel.
“If immunity is not granted to a president, all future presidents who leave office will be immediately impeached by the opposing party,” Cheung said. Without full immunity, a President of the United States would not be able to function properly. »
In their decision, the judges of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit refuted this argument as follows: “For the purposes of this criminal case, former President Trump became the citizen Trump, with all the defenses of any other criminal defendant. But any executive immunity that might have protected him while he was president no longer protects him from these prosecutions. »
Is the Supreme Court required to take up this case?
No way. After reviewing the appeal court’s decision, it can uphold it and return the case immediately to trial judge Tanya Chutkan, who would then have a clear path to holding the trial to which she was assigned.
The judges of the highest court could base the dismissal of the case on various reasons, including the strength and unanimity of the 57-page decision signed by Justices Childs, Pan and Henderson, as well as the weakness of the arguments formulated by Donald Trump.
They might further decide that they are already busy enough with one cause regarding the 2024 presidential election without adding a second one. On Thursday, they will have to hear the arguments of the parties involved in the case Trump v. Anderson. This concerns the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision to disqualify Donald Trump from that state’s Republican primary under Article 3 of 14e amendment.
This section prohibits any person who has taken an oath to support the Constitution from holding office if he or she subsequently engages in insurrection.
How does the Supreme Court decide to take up a case?
All it takes is for four of the nine judges to decide that a case is worth pursuing for the Supreme Court to take it up. Normally, this might be the case for the criminal immunity of a former president accused of crimes, a subject that is being discussed for the first time, courtesy of Donald Trump.
But the context may not be the most favorable, given the agenda at the Supreme Court and the electoral calendar in the United States.
Nevertheless: some observers believe that the most conservative justices of the Supreme Court, in this case Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, will want to get involved in this affair. The question is whether at least two of the court’s four other conservative justices — John Roberts, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett — would join them (it seems unlikely, if not impossible, that the court’s three progressive justices refuse to be satisfied with the eloquent decision of the Washington Court of Appeal).
Only four judges decided to refer the case to the Supreme Court Dobbs v. Jacksonwhich led to the repeal of the judgment Roe v. Wade on abortion: Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.
Remember these names carefully.
When would a Supreme Court decision come down?
It is on this question that Donald Trump bases his greatest hopes. In the four criminal cases against him, he is ready to use all the means at his disposal, including appeal procedures, to postpone his meeting with justice to a date later than the presidential election.
If the Supreme Court agrees to consider the question of immunity, he could have his wish granted regarding his post-election conspiracy trial in Washington. Because nothing obliges the highest court to render a rapid decision.
But “Citizen Trump” must prepare for any eventuality, including that of being quickly dismissed by the Supreme Court.