Donald Trump is starting to buy time. Judge Tanya Chutkan, in charge of the case surrounding the former president's attempt to change the result of the 2020 presidential election, has decided to suspend the investigation into the case while she decides on the defendant's immunity and whether he will be charged on two counts different trials for the same facts. The judge rejected that immunity, but Trump's lawyers appealed to the appeals court and the judge acknowledges that she cannot move forward with the case and prepare for trial until this matter is resolved.
Most appeals against a court decision in the preliminary investigation do not paralyze the case. But this is what happens in the immunity dispute, because whether Trump can be prosecuted and tried depends on what is decided. In a three-page order published this Friday, the judge explains this, citing precedent. “It is up to the appeal court to decide whether the legal dispute can be continued in the district court. (…) It makes no sense to continue the trial while the appeals court considers whether there should be one,” the precedent states, and the judge says that this reasoning applies to immunity and mutual appeals Criminal liability should be applied. .
Chutkan's ruling suspends any “further proceedings that advance the trial or impose additional litigation burdens on the defendant.” However, he leaves open the possibility of maintaining the scheduled trial date if the case returns to his court, stating that the date and other deadlines have been postponed and not canceled. He also says the gag order restricting Trump's speech against witnesses and members of the court and other evidentiary orders remain visible.
If the trial is delayed, it is possible that the trial will not begin as planned on March 4, the eve of Super Tuesday, the most important day of the primaries. His delay strategy, which included going to the Supreme Court, could even delay the process until after the November presidential election. If Trump wins this election, he could get the Justice Department to drop his allegations. In extreme cases, he could even pardon himself.
The role of the Supreme Court
To prevent the case from being so delayed, special prosecutor Jack Smith preemptively appealed to the Supreme Court and asked it to rule on immunity without waiting for the appeals court's decision. In an 81-page brief, Smith asked Supreme Court justices to decide whether Trump can be prosecuted or enjoy immunity over allegations that he conspired to change the results of the 2020 election. On the same Monday, the Supreme Court issued an order agreeing to expedite the consideration of the case. The court has asked Trump's lawyers to submit their response by December 20 at 4 p.m.
Join EL PAÍS to follow all the news and read without restrictions.
Subscribe to
“This case raises a fundamental question at the heart of our democracy: whether a former president is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office or is constitutionally protected from federal prosecution if he has been charged but not convicted “, the prosecutor claimed in his letter to the Supreme Court. “It is of compelling public importance that the defendant's immunity claims be determined by this court and that the defendant's trial proceed as expeditiously as possible if his immunity request is rejected,” it continued.
Cases before the Supreme Court typically take several months from admission to judgment, but there are times when timelines are shortened. Fifty years ago, the justices acted within two months when asked to force President Richard Nixon to release the Oval Office recordings in the Watergate scandal. The tapes were later used in the corruption trials of former Nixon aides in 1974.
Currently, if the Supreme Court justices refuse to intervene, the appeal would continue to be heard by the Washington Circuit Court of Appeals.
Follow all international information on Facebook and Xor in our weekly newsletter.