In August of 2023, Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into the January 6 Capital attacks resulted in Trump being indicted on four counts. Click here to learn more about Trump’s other indictments. His investigation was based on allegations that Trump conspired to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Let’s take a closer look as to what has happened since then. 

Background

Upon being indicted, Trump asked the U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan threw out any and all charges, arguing that he shouldn’t be held liable for acts he officially took as president even if he isn’t in office anymore. 

Chutkan denied Trump’s request and his ruling was upheld. Immediately, Trump went to the Supreme Court in order to change the decision. They agreed to weigh in and trial was initially scheduled for late February, however, delays in their rulings have resulted in no decisions being made until now. 

Why Should Trump Receive Immunity?

John Sauer, Trump’s representative, argued that presidential immunity from criminal charges is vital and that without it, “presidency as we know it” will be doomed. He stated that it would make presidents hesitant to act at times when they need to be bold. 

Not only that, but one of Sauer’s main arguments was that the court’s decision would have a resounding effect on future presidents and their actions. His example was that depending on the court’s decision, current President Joe Biden could be criminally charged for his actions right now, such as unlawfully allowing immigrants to enter the United States. 

The Detriments of Granting Criminal Immunity

The opposing side had Michael Dreeben, a lawyer from Smith’s office, that represented the US. He argued that such a decision, the one to grant complete criminal immunity, has never been granted to any individual in history. Trump seeks permanent criminal immunity for all presidential acts unless he was first impeached and then convicted by the Senate. 

Why Criminal Immunity is Difficult to Give

Several justices asked Sauer how to distinguish official acts from private acts. Official acts are those which a president takes for the country and would receive immunity. Conversely, private acts are the exact opposite and would not be able receive immunity from the Supreme Court. 

Chief Justice John Roberts accurately stated that it would be extremely difficult, if not near impossible, to differentiate official acts from private acts. Not only that, but if they were to do so, there are several scenarios where one would be able to get away with committing crimes since it would partly be an “official act.”

What do the Justices Think?

Right now, it is a near even split amongst the justices. Four of the court’s conservative justices – Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh – appear to lean towards some form of immunity from Trump. They believe that this decision has a tremendous upholding on the future election and making a wrong decision, aka the one to not give Trump some immunity, would end very poorly. On the other hand, the rest of the justices believe that it is important to set a precedent that no president should simply receive criminal immunity and that their actions should anyways abide by the law. 

The decision now lies in the hands of the Chief Justice John G. Roberts, whose verdict still lies unclear. It is unsure as to when the final ruling will be made since it has already been 4 months since the said time. Stay updated as time goes on.