Trump is not immune from prosecution for bid to subvert the 2020 election, appeals court rules

The ruling affirms U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan’s
historic conclusion that former presidents may be prosecuted for crimes they committed in office, even if those alleged crimes are arguably related to their official duties as president. Trump had argued that former presidents could not be prosecuted for such actions without first being impeached and convicted by Congress.

The pace of the appeals court’s action has been
closely scrutinized and, in some ways, could be as significant as the substance of the ruling. The decision Tuesday ultimately came 28 days after
oral arguments, slowing Smith’s case and
forcing a delay in Trump’s scheduled March 4 trial, but leaving open the possibility that a jury could be convened to hear the case against him sometime this spring.

The judges
put their decision on hold only until Monday to allow Trump to ask the Supreme Court to take up the case on an emergency basis. However, they said that if he does so, the decision won’t take effect until the high court acts on his request. Trump could also ask the full bench of the D.C. Circuit to rehear the case, but the panel said doing that won’t delay the return of the case to Chutkan unless the full court agrees to a rehearing, which requires a majority of the active judges.

The force of the unanimous ruling Tuesday, backed by a bipartisan panel of judges, may have been worth the wait for Smith. Rather than a splintered decision that could be picked apart more easily, the ruling provides the first-ever legal and political framework for bringing a former president to trial.