In win for Trump, Supreme Court immunity ruling will delay trial. Here’s what’s next. - The Boston Globe (2024)

What happens next?

The Supreme Court sent the case back to Trump’s trial judge, U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan, to determine which acts alleged in the indictment are official and which are not. That creates the prospect of a mini-trial this summer or fall over allegations in Trump’s indictment.

The court defined the scope of official immunity as covering actions made within a president's core constitutional duties, ruling out charges for Trump's alleged discussions to pressure Justice Department leaders to support his false claims of voter fraud. The high court said a closer call was whether Trump's interactions with Vice President Mike Pence, state officials, private parties or his public statements in the run-up to the Jan. 6, 2021, riot were protected - suggesting that a lower court could find he was speaking as a candidate or party leader rather than as president.

Will Trump face trial before the presidential election on Nov. 5?

Probably not.

Chutkan’s decisions will be appealable, making it highly unlikely, if not impossible, that the 45th president will go to trial on charges of trying to subvert the 2020 election before voters cast ballots in this year’s presidential contest, in which Trump is the presumptive Republican nominee.

Trump’s attorneys and prosecutors working with special counsel Smith will be allowed to argue over what elements in the indictment are immune from prosecution, a process that will require written briefings, oral argument and a decision. Either side also could appeal the results again, triggering another cycle or review by the federal appeals court in D.C. and the Supreme Court that would almost certainly extend into 2025, after the next president is elected.

For comparison, remember that when Trump was president, it took more than two years for the courts to determine that Congress and New York state could access his tax records.

If Trump wins November’s election and returns to the White House, he could not be prosecuted while in office. He also could order the Justice Department to drop its case against him.

How long could it take to go to trial? How long would trial last?

Before Trump appealed in early December, a schedule set by Chutkan indicated that the case could be ready for trial in less than three months. Once the case is returned to her, the judge is likely to ask both sides to propose a new schedule that could include demands for additional time to litigate immunity issues, or proposals to streamline the schedule, such as by tightening response deadlines or narrowing the government’s case.

Potential jurors had also been notified by mail three months in advance of the planned March 4 trial date to assess their availability. That process of selecting or notifying a potential jury pool would probably have to be repeated, although the court could find ways to speed that process.

Finally, prosecutors originally estimated that they would take about three weeks to present their case at trial. That timeline could also be tightened by prosecutors after the Supreme Court narrowed the case.

What is the election obstruction case about?

Special counsel Smith has accused Trump of leading a criminal conspiracy to thwart the peaceful transfer of political power, alleging that the president was so determined to hold on to the White House that he propagated a flood of lies claiming that the election was stolen, culminating in the violent Jan. 6 assault on the U.S. Capitol.

The 45-page, four-count indictment says Trump attempted to use knowingly false claims of massive fraud to get state officials to act to change voting results; threatened Justice Department leaders to open sham investigations alleging election crimes; tried to submit fraudulent slates of electors from key swing states to obstruct Congress’s certification proceeding; and pressured his vice president, Pence, to use his ceremonial role overseeing the Jan. 6 proceedings to overturn the results.

Trump allegedly did so despite being told repeatedly that his claims were untrue, including by his attorney general, the nation’s top intelligence officials, White House lawyers and campaign aides. The special counsel has charged that the conspiracy targeted and destabilized a bedrock function of the government - collecting, counting and certifying presidential election results - and continued trying to exploit the violence at the Capitol to press lawmakers to change their positions.

Trump denies all wrongdoing and has accused President Biden and the Justice Department of trying to interfere with the 2024 election by targeting him, the GOP front-runner.

What does this mean for Trump’s other criminal cases?

The decision should not affect Trump’s state criminal conviction in New York on 34 counts of falsifying business records related to a $130,000 hush money payment made to adult-film actress Stormy Daniels in 2016, on the eve of that year’s presidential election. The former president faces sentencing in that case July 11.

Some Republican lawmakers, however, are floating legislation that would allow former presidents to move future state cases to federal court, where they could enjoy greater protections.

The ruling could impact Trump’s state election-interference trial in Georgia, where he has raised a similar immunity defense. It is not clear whether it would affect his federal prosecution in Florida for allegedly retaining classified documents after leaving the White House and obstructing government efforts to retrieve them.

In state charges in Fulton County, Ga., Trump is charged with conspiring with more than a dozen others to subvert the 2020 election results in that state. That case is unlikely to come to trial before the November election while an appeals court reviews allegations that a romantic relationship between Fulton County District Attorney Fani T. Willis (D) and her lead prosecutor has tainted the case.

Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee had said he would wait for the Supreme Court decision before ruling on an immunity claim by Trump’s lead counsel, Steve Sadow. Court filings suggest that Trump’s legal team is preparing to litigate whether his alleged actions were undertaken as part of his official duties, and thus potentially immune from prosecution, or as unprotected “private conduct.”

One such “unofficial act,” conceded by Trump attorney D. John Sauer in oral argument before the Supreme Court, has been alleged by both federal and state prosecutors - namely that Trump knowingly signed a verification of a Dec. 31, 2020, lawsuit against Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp (R) that made election fraud claims he had been told were false. The same week, Sadow asked the Georgia court to dismiss two counts against Trump, including a false-documents charge related to that lawsuit against Kemp, claiming that state prosecutors lack “the authority to criminalize conduct” that is targeted at a federal judiciary.