LOS ANGELES.–Today’s ruling by D.C.’s 4th Circuit Court of Appeals three-judge panel that 77-year-old former President Donald Trump is not immune to prosecution in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Aug. 9, 2023 election subversion case forces Trump’s legal team to appeal to the Supreme Court. Today’s ruling upholds District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan’s ruling that alleged criminal acts while president do not afford Trump a lifelong “get out of jail card,” meaning he was not immune to criminal prosecution. Beyond the obvious that Trump must appeal now to the Supreme Court to delay his federal trial indefinitely, the three-judge panel gave an immediate boost to the campaign of 51-year-old former U.N. Amb. Nikki Haley. Trump had a virtual lock on the GOP nomination until today’s ruling that raises more doubts that his legal problems could, in fact, derail in 2024 presidential campaign.
Requesting an urgent appeal to the Supreme Court doesn’t mean the High Court would take up Trump’s case, letting the appeals court ruling stand without intervention. On the question of presidential immunity, the Supreme Court still has the final say, despite the three-judge panel ruling that presidential immunity does not extend to anything but normal presidential business. Trump was indicted by Special Counsel Jack Smith for participating in the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection, something beyond the scope of presidential duties. Trump is on record telling former Vice President Mike Pence to stop the Jan. 6, 2021 Electoral College vote certification and refer the certification back to the states. Pence ignored Trump’s orders, saying he lacked the authority to do anything more than preside over the certification of the Nov. 3, 2020 Electoral College vote certification.
If the Supreme Court refuses to hear Trump’s case, they would by default accept the Circuit Court three-judge ruling that Trump does not have immunity for the Jan. 6, 2021 attempt to subvert the Electoral College vote certification. But in ruling today, the three-judge panel admitted that Trump had no right to disenfranchise U.S. voters whose Electoral College votes were certified on Jan. 6. Trump’s legal team could argue that the issue of presidential immunity is not connected with any alleged illegal acts charged to Trump due to the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection. No three-judge panel can determine whether or not the facts in Smith’s case warrant conviction for any of the charges against Trump. When the three-judge panel commented about the rights of voters to have the Electoral College certification, that went beyond the scope of the three-judge panel.
D.C. 4th Circuit Court deliberated for one month on the question of presidential immunity, not on the merits of Smith’s case or facts currently in evidence. Only a jury of Trump’s peers are afforded the right, in the U.S. criminal justice system, to rule on questions of facts. No one knows yet whether the Supreme Court would take up Trump’s request for appeal.
“Prosecuting a President for official acts violates the Constitution and threatens the bedrock of our Republic. President Trump respectfully disagrees with the D.C. Circuit’s decision and will appeal it in order to safeguard the Presidency and the Constitution,” said Steven Chung, Trump campaign spokesman in a statement. Trump was accused by Special Counsel Jack Smith with four counts Aug. 9, 2023, alleging Trump conspired to overturn the 2020 election and instructed supporters to block the Jan. 6, 2021 Electoral College vote certification.
No three-judge panel can rule on the merits of Smith’s case against Trump or any of the evidence to be weighed eventually by a jury of Trump’s peers. Raising the issue of disenfranchising voters indicates that the three-judge panel held prejudice against Trump, accepting Smith’s indictments as fact. In deciding to accept Trump’s request for writ of Cetiorari, the Supreme Court must decide whether there’s a compelling reason. If the Supreme Court accepts the appeals court three-judge ruling, then Smith’s case will return to Chutkan’s District Court for trial. Supreme Court has already agreed to rule on whether the Colorado Supreme Court had a right to exclude Trump from the ballot due to Section 3 of the 14th Amendment banning insurrectionists from running for public office. Certainly more delays in Trump’s case are in the offing.
Ruling against Trump today, the D.C. Circuit Court three-judge panel rejected claims of presidential immunity. “Any executive immunity that may have protected [Trump] while he serves as President no longer protects him against this prosecution,” the three-judge panel wrote in a 57-page ruling. If Trump wants a continued stay of Smith’s pending trial, he must ask the Supreme Court to take up his presidential immunity case. As it stands now the Supreme Court will likely take the case, for no other reason, they see the urgency during an Election Year. Trump’s backers and others now must consider whether the former president could indeed face conviction for his actions on Jan. 6. Voters ignoring Trump’s legal challenges are forced to take a serious look at whether his campaign remains viable. Any felony conviction would certainly end Trump’s 2024 campaign.
About the Author
John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He’s editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.
