In a tense session before a U.S. appeals court, Donald Trump’s legal team faced rigorous questioning regarding the former president’s claim of immunity in the election subversion case. Trump, set to go to trial in March, asserts that he cannot be criminally charged for actions taken during his presidency. However, the panel of three judges expressed skepticism, challenging the notion that a former president should be immune from prosecution.
During the hearing, Trump’s lawyer, D. John Sauer, defended the argument that a former president could only be charged for serious conduct if first impeached by the House of Representatives and convicted in the Senate. Judge Florence Pan questioned the implications, asking if a president could sell pardons or military secrets or instruct special forces to eliminate a political rival.
Following the hearing, Trump, who claims to be a victim of political persecution, warned of potential “bedlam in this country” if the case proceeds. He refused to comment on whether he would discourage his supporters from resorting to violence.
In a video posted on social media before the hearing, Trump issued a direct threat, suggesting that if he doesn’t receive immunity, he might pursue criminal charges against Joe Biden if the Democrat were to win the upcoming presidential election.
Prosecutors argue that Trump, by pressuring officials to overturn election results and inciting supporters to march on the Capitol, acted as a candidate, not a president. The looming criminal trial, scheduled for March, could have significant implications for Trump’s political future.
The U.S. Justice Department contends that presidents cannot be prosecuted for official duties while in office. Trump, facing 91 criminal counts in four separate cases, is the first former U.S. president to undergo criminal prosecution.
Sauer argued that allowing prosecution to proceed would set a dangerous precedent, leading to a cycle of retribution after each election. The Justice Department countered, emphasizing that the president is not above the law, and granting immunity for actions related to election subversion would pave the way for future presidents to commit crimes.
The appeals court’s ruling, both in terms of outcome and timing, will play a crucial role in determining whether Trump faces trial before the November election. The case, accusing Trump of a multi-pronged conspiracy to hinder the certification of his 2020 defeat, is one of four criminal prosecutions he faces this year.
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, overseeing the case, has already rejected Trump’s immunity claim. The appeals court’s decision, expected in the coming weeks, could further delay the scheduled March 4 start of the trial. Regardless of the outcome, the case is likely to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
