The United States Supreme Court will hold an unprecedented hearing on Thursday to hear arguments for and against the attempted donald trump to save himself from the trial of the assault on the Capitol by claiming that he has criminal immunity for having been president of the country.
The decision made by the high court will not only affect the criminal trial pending in Washington, but also the process that Trump has in Florida for having taken classified documents and the one he has in Georgia for having tried to overturn the elections in that state.
It will also set the course of the electoral campaign for the elections on November 5, in which the Republican will fight again with the current president, the Democrat. Joe Biden.
The question that the Supreme Court must resolve is Whether a former president enjoys presidential immunity before a criminal prosecution for official acts carried out during his mandate.
The Republican’s defense has requested that the four criminal charges against the New York magnate be dismissed in Washington for his alleged attempt to reverse the 2020 election results and having instigated the 2021 assault on the Capitol, claiming that he has immunity for having been president.
Both the judge in the case and an appeals court have rejected the petition, so Trump elevated the case to the Supreme Court, which in February admitted studying it.
The highest judicial authority in the country has never ruled on such an issue given that a former president had never been criminally charged.
Jurisprudence in the United States establishes that Sitting presidents cannot be criminally prosecuted so as not to violate the separation of powers between the executive and the judiciary.
Trump’s lawyers argue that when they are former presidents they should also enjoy that immunity because, otherwise, presidents would not be independent in their decision-making for fear of being judged when leaving office.
Jack Smiththe prosecutor prosecuting the accusation, maintains that no one is above the law and that the mere fact that no other former president in history has been indicted before demonstrates that Trump’s conduct is unprecedented.
In separate writings sent to the Supreme Court, the defense and the prosecution invoke the figure of the former president Richard Nixon (1969-1974), who was sued by an Air Force employee who was unfairly fired by the president.
In that case, the Supreme Court ruled in 1982, when Nixon was no longer in the White House, that former presidents cannot be prosecuted civilly for actions they carried out while they were in office.
Trump argues that if former leaders are immune from civil proceedings, they should also be immune from criminal proceedings because these represent a much greater intrusion on the independence of the presidents.
But Smith maintains that the pardon Nixon received from his successor, Gerald Fordin the face of any possible accusation for the scandal of Watergatewhich had led to his resignation in 1974, shows that former presidents can be prosecuted.
The Supreme Court usually issues its rulings in June, before the summer recess, but the prosecution is pushing for a quick decision so that preparations for the trial of the assault on the Capitol, which should have started on March 4, can be restarted.
Trump’s strategy, on the other hand, is to delay all judicial processes until after the November elections, given that if he returns to the White House he could order the Department of Justice to drop the federal charges against him.
The mere fact that the high court, with three of its nine judges appointed by Trump himself, admitted the immunity case to study was already a victory for the Republican because it delayed the judicial calendar.
(With information from EFE)
