WASHINGTON: The US Supreme Court has declined to immediately hear former president Donald Trump’s claim that he is immune from prosecution, potentially delaying his 2020 election interference trial.

Special Counsel Jack Smith had asked the nation’s highest court to take up the immunity case on an expedited basis, bypassing the federal court of appeals.

The Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, including three justices nominated by Trump, denied the request in a one-line order that did not provide any reason for the decision.

Trump, the frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination, is currently scheduled to go on trial on March 4, 2024 on charges of conspiring to overturn the 2020 election won by Biden.

Arguments before DC appeals court to begin on Jan 9

US District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is to preside over Trump’s March trial, rejected the immunity claim on Dec 1, saying an ex-president does not have a lifelong ‘get-out-of-jail-free’ pass.

Trump’s lawyers appealed her decision to the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit as Smith, the special counsel, asked the Supreme Court to hear the case.

Appeals court hearing

With the SC’s rejection of Smith’s request, the appeals court will now first hear the immunity case.

Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond, said this could make it difficult to maintain the March trial date. The Supreme Court had agreed to “fast-track” appeals in 19 cases over the past four years and it was unclear why the justices had declined to do so here, Tobias noted.

Trump welcomed the SC move and said he was looking forward to presenting his arguments before the appeals court. “Of course I am entitled to Presidential Immunity,” he said in a post on his Truth Social platform.

“I was President, it was my right and duty to investigate, and speak on, the rigged and stolen 2020 Presidential Election,” he said, repeating his baseless claims to have won the election.

The DC appeals court has scheduled arguments for January 9, 2024 and its ruling is expected to eventually reach the SC, whose current session ends in June.

Published in Dawn, December 24th, 2023

Opinion

Editorial

Quid pro quo
Updated 26 Jul, 2026

Quid pro quo

Accepting Israel would mean legitimising its violence against the Palestinians, as well as its neighbouring Arab states and Iran.
AI in government
26 Jul, 2026

AI in government

THE Prime Minister’s Office has announced the introduction of an AI-powered digital system and directed ministries...
Cautious optimism
26 Jul, 2026

Cautious optimism

THE latest polio surveillance figures offer some encouraging news regarding the difficult fight against polio. The...
Rampant lawlessness
Updated 25 Jul, 2026

Rampant lawlessness

THE brutal slaying of a judge and his guard in Mastung is the latest in a series of blood-drenched events that have...
Daily fuel pricing
25 Jul, 2026

Daily fuel pricing

THE government’s move to daily petroleum price adjustments should make fuel pricing more transparent and more...
The drug problem
25 Jul, 2026

The drug problem

WHILE Islamabad Police chase low-level peddlers, the capital’s kingpins have quietly taken their operations ...