Should the Supreme Court Dismiss Trump's Federal Indictment?

Trending Polls:

• Do You Support Texas' New Immigration Law?

• Should the Government Ban "Squatter's Rights"?

• Is Fani Willis a Fair and Unbiased Prosecutor?

• Does Biden Want to Kill the NRA?

• Do You Support a National TikTok Ban?

Here’s the Scoop

Former President Donald Trump’s legal team has urged the Supreme Court to dismiss the federal indictment charging him with conspiring to overturn the 2020 election results.

They argue that Trump enjoyed sweeping immunity from prosecution for official acts during his presidency, and that denying this immunity would incapacitate future presidents with blackmail and extortion.

However, prosecutors, led by special counsel Jack Smith, have insisted that Trump’s actions related to the 2020 election do not constitute official acts by a president, but rather were actions taken in his capacity as a candidate to overturn the election for his own benefit.

Two lower courts have already rejected Trump’s immunity argument, but the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case in the hope of settling the larger constitutional question.

Trump’s lawyers also told the justices that if they don’t accept his immunity arguments, they should send the case back to the district court for additional “fact-finding,” resulting in even lengthier delays before a trial could be scheduled.

In their brief, Trump’s lawyers underscored that for the first 244 years of the constitutional republic, “no former, or current president faced criminal charges for his official acts.”

They cited Nixon v. Fitzgerald, a Supreme Court case from 1982, which determined that presidents enjoy absolute immunity from liability for civil damages based on official acts — but did not grant absolute immunity for criminal charges stemming from actions taken while in office.

Trump’s team also insisted that the president was acting in his official capacity to assess whether the “election was tainted by fraud and irregularities.” However, US District Judge Tanya Chutkan rejected his arguments last December, concluding presidents aren’t entitled to a “lifelong get-out-of-jail-free pass.”

As the Supreme Court faces a docket loaded with politically charged cases this session, it’s worth noting that Trump appointed one-third of the justices on the bench.

The presumptive Republican nominee is the first current or former president to get criminally indicted and is facing a total of 88 counts spanning four indictments. Trump has denied wrongdoing and pleaded not guilty across the board.

What do you think? Let us know by participating in our poll.