Last Friday, one of the main criminal cases against former President Donald Trump returned to a federal trial court in Washington, D.C. This case involves Trump’s conduct in office after the 2020 presidential election. A grand jury indicted him in August 2023 on four counts, which involved his alleged efforts to overturn the election results by spreading knowingly false claims of election fraud.
Trump tried to get the case dismissed, arguing that he had absolute immunity from prosecution. The trial court and the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that former presidents lack immunity. Trump then took this argument to the U.S. Supreme Court. In a controversial opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for a 6-3 majority in outlining a rule for the immunity of former presidents. Roberts explained that absolute immunity shields a former president when they acted under their exclusive constitutional powers. Moreover, a former president “is at least presumptively immune” from criminal charges based on any other official actions. On the other hand, no immunity shields a former president from charges based on their unofficial acts. This makes the distinction between official and unofficial conduct critical.
The Supreme Court sent the case back to the lower courts to determine which parts of the indictment should move forward. Under Court rules, a 32-day waiting period generally must elapse before a case returns. This allows the losing side to ask the Justices to reconsider their decision. The waiting period expired on Friday, and the D.C. Circuit promptly transferred the case back to the trial court. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan now must sort through each of the allegations while applying the guidance that the Supreme Court provided.
Initially, Chutkan had sought to resolve the case efficiently. She had rejected Trump’s efforts to postpone the trial until after the 2024 election, when he hopes to reclaim the presidency. A trial before the election now looks unlikely. As Chutkan analyzes the indictment, though, she could order an evidentiary hearing that digs into the details of the allegations. This would help her decide which actions fall within the scope of the immunity described by the Supreme Court. Trump’s opponents would welcome this hearing. Even though it would not result in a conviction, it could call attention to Trump’s involvement in the U.S. Capitol attack on January 6, 2021.
On Saturday, Chutkan denied another motion to dismiss the indictment, while leaving the door open for Trump to renew the motion once the immunity issues have been resolved. She also set a status conference for August 16 to determine a schedule for further pre-trial proceedings. (Trump will not need to appear at the conference.)
Photo Credit: Jonah Elkowitz / Shutterstock.com