Court rejects Donald Trump's presidential immunity claim

A federal appeals court in Washington DC has rejected Donald Trumps claim that he has presidential immunity over a possible criminal prosecution on charges that he plotted to overturn the 2020 election result.

The panel of three judges also categorically denied Trump's position that he could only be prosecuted in a criminal case if he had been convicted in a Senate impeachment, which he hasn't.

The three judge panel produced an unanimous opinion, stating: “We cannot accept former President Trump’s claim that a President has unbounded authority to commit crimes that would neutralize the most fundamental check on executive power.

“At bottom, former President Trump’s stance would collapse our system of separated powers by placing the President beyond the reach of all three Branches. We cannot accept that the office of the Presidency places its former occupants above the law for all time thereafter.”

Trump has until 12 February to inform the DC circuit courts of whether he will seek a stay of the decision by appealing to the US supreme court. If he doesn't appeal, it will cause the resumption of pre-trial proceedings. If he does appeal, the case would be delayed until the supreme court issues a final decision.

What are Trump's charges?

The indictment brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith accuses Trump of using false claims of voter fraud to pressure state lawmakers, Justice Department officials and then-Vice President Mike Pence to thwart the certification of the election results. It is one four criminal cases facing Trump and one of two alleging interference in the 2020 election.

What has happened so far in Trump's case

Last year, Trump filed a motion to dismiss the federal election interference case brought by the special counsel, which charged the former president with seeking to reverse his 2020 election defeat, including by advancing fake electors and obstructing Congress on 6 January 2021.

The motion has rejected by the trial judge, giving Trump the right to appeal to the DC circuit, who has released their opinion today. The special counsel attempted to bypass the appeals process and requested the case move directly to the supreme court. However, they returned the case to the appeals court as per process.

What happened in the court room?

Trump's deafeat was expected on both sides after his appellate lawyer, John Sauer, was always on the defensive when he spoke at oral arguments last month in front of the three-judge panel of Michelle Childs, Karen Henderson, and Florence Pan.

At the hearing, Sauer was forced to contend with Pan, who had brought to him the claim that Trump's interpretation would mean Presidents could hypothetically self-pardon, sell military secrets or order the assassinations of political rivals and never have to face criminal accountability. Sauer ultimately acknowledged with a "qualified yes" on the basis that they had been convicted in a Senate impeachment trial first. He also confessed that Presidents did not have absolute immunity.

The circuit judges also cornered Sauer with comments made by Trump’s lawyer during his second impeachment trial, who had argued that senators should acquit Trump for incitement of insurrection because no former office holder was immune from investigation and prosecution.

Trump’s lawyer said he disagreed with the characterization of those remarks. Sauer said it referred to Trump being investigated generally, and, in any event, “office holders” referred to lesser government officials, not the President himself.

What next for Trump?

Trump has made no secret of the fact that his overarching legal strategy is to seek delays, because if he were to win the 2024 presidential election in November and the trial had not yet started or had not been completed, he could appoint as the attorney general a loyalist who would drop the charges against him.