Former US President Donald Trump has appealed to the US Supreme Court, seeking its intervention in a decision by the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. The DC Circuit had denied Trump’s assertion of “absolute” presidential immunity from criminal prosecution in the federal 2020 election interference case. Trump also requested the court to stall the progression of trial-court proceedings.
Trump’s Supreme Court filing sought two things. Firstly, the issuance of a stay on the lower court proceedings. This, if not granted, would see the immediate recommencement of the trial court proceedings. Secondly, the court was asked to consider his appeal on the immunity claim.
While requesting the stay, Trump pointed out that his case “easily satisfies [the court’s] traditional factors for granting a stay of the mandate”. He expressed his belief that his appeal would be successful, labeling it a matter of great public importance. He also posited that the court had the authority to reverse the DC Circuit decision, referring to it as a “stunning breach of precedent and historical norms”. He echoed his counsel’s arguments from the circuit bench.
In the writ of certiorari part of his filing, Trump asked the court to deliberate upon two questions:
- “Whether the doctrine of absolute presidential immunity includes immunity from criminal prosecution for a President’s official acts;”
- “Whether the Impeachment Judgment Clause … and principles of double jeopardy preclude the criminal prosecution of a President who has been impeached and acquitted by the Senate for the same or closely related conduct that is the basis for the criminal charges.”
Trump stressed the need for the Supreme Court to take up the appeal due to the far-reaching implications of the DC Circuit decision denying presidential immunity in criminal prosecutions. He also reiterated his argument regarding the separation of powers, stating that “the Judicial Branch cannot sit in judgment directly over the President’s official acts”.
While the judiciary has previously ruled that presidents may enjoy immunity in certain civil lawsuit scenarios, it has not spoken on the matter of presidential immunity in criminal prosecutions. Due to this novel concern and the implications it holds, Trump urged the Supreme Court to consider his appeal. He firmly asserted that, should any court have to rule on this matter for the first time, it should be the Supreme Court.
The prosecutor overseeing the case against Trump, Special Prosecutor Jack Smith, requested the Supreme Court to take up the issue back in December 2023. However, the court declined to do so without providing a reason. The situation now presents the court with an opportunity to reconsider approaching this issue. It requires agreement from four of the nine justices to take up the appeal.