The Supreme Court of the United States decided to examine the claims raised by former President Donald Trump, that a former president enjoys immunity from criminal prosecution for official actions while in office.
During the month of April, the highest judicial body with a conservative majority will hear the arguments of the parties on whether former President Trump can be tried for his efforts to overturn the result of the 2020 elections. The decision, which is expected to be taken at the end of June, will cause further delays in Mr Trump's legal battles.
The Supreme Court agreed Wednesday to consider former President Donald Trump's claims that he enjoys immunity from prosecution over efforts to overturn the outcome of the 2020 election he lost.
Wednesday's ruling will further delay Mr. Trump's court proceedings as he runs to return to the White House and leaves the nation's highest court with a conservative 6-3 majority when three justices are appointed by Mr. Trump, in the center of attention in the election battle.
The Supreme Court's decision to review the claim temporarily suspends the trial that had begun over Mr. Trump's efforts to overturn the election result, which is being led by Special Counsel Jack Smith. The trial will not start on March 4 as planned and there is no new trial date.
Former President Trump claims he enjoys immunity from prosecution because he was president at the time he took actions aimed at overturning the election result that was won by Democrat Joe Biden.
The Supreme Court will review the appeals court's decision, which rejected Mr Trump's claims that he enjoys immunity from prosecution.
Arguments on this issue will be heard in April, while the decision is expected to be taken at the end of June.
The judges will focus on one question: “If, and if so, to what extent a former president enjoys presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for actions that allegedly involved official acts during his term in the White House.”
Rebecca Gill, a professor of political science at the University of Nevada, says it's not clear what decision might be made.
“I think there are very few legal scholars who think that a majority of the court would agree that the president enjoys this kind of broad immunity over any act in office, much less the acts alleged here. “But that doesn't mean it's a happy day for Jack Smith's office, because that will necessarily delay things to some extent,” she says.
Mr. Trump in a post on social networks welcomed the decision of the Supreme Court to consider his request for immunity.
“Without presidential immunity, a president is unable to function properly or make decisions in the best interest of the United States of America,” he wrote.
On February 6, the Court of Appeals in Washington rejected Mr Trump's immunity claim. The body composed of three judges expressed in the reasoning of the decision that “it could not accept that the institution of the president, places the former office holders above the law for the rest of the time after they have left office”.
Mr. Trump's supporters stormed the Capitol in January 2021, with the goal of blocking the confirmation of President Biden.
That's after Mr. Trump and his allies made false claims that the 2020 election was rigged and hatched a plan to use fake voters to prevent Mr. Biden from winning.
If former President Trump returns to the White House, he could use the authority to block criminal prosecutions against him, or pardon himself for any federal crime.
On Wednesday, a judge in Illinois decided to remove Mr. Trump's name from the list of Republican presidential candidates for the primary elections in this state … relying on arguments that the former president violated the 14th amendment of the Constitution. But this decision will not come into force, pending its appeal by Mr. Trump.
The Supreme Court, which is also considering this case, is expected to soon rule on a similar case in the state of Colorado, which has removed Mr. Trump's name from the list of candidates. The court heard the arguments in this case at the beginning of February and now the decision is expected.