Trial Delay

The Supreme Court has long recognized a strong public interest in speedy criminal law enforcement – an interest that is paramount in U.S. v. Trump, the federal case against Trump for allegedly conspiring to overturn the 2020 election in violation of several federal criminal laws. As the district court judge recognized, “the public interest in the prosecution of this case carries grave weight.” But the district court proceedings have now been frozen since December and the originally scheduled March 4, 2024, trial has been postponed indefinitely while the former president pursues an unprecedented (and unfounded) immunity defense. He is now asking the Supreme Court to continue to keep the case on hold in order to delay the trial until after the election. The Court should not permit the case to be stayed any longer because there is no good legal reason to do so.

Two federal courts have rejected Trump’s claim to immunity from criminal prosecution as having no basis whatsoever in law or history. As the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals explained, “It would be a striking paradox if the President, who alone is vested with the constitutional authority to ‘take Care that the laws be faithfully executed,’ were the sole officer capable of defying those laws with impunity.” The Supreme Court need not take the case, but if it does, it will almost certainly uphold those decisions. So the Court should act quickly to refuse to continue the stay of trial proceedings – even if it decides to review the lower court decisions – and should expedite all aspects of its review. The Court has moved quickly to review and decide many other high-profile cases with political significance, including Bush v. Gore, United States v. Nixon, and just recently, Trump v. Anderson, the 14th Amendment ballot disqualification case that Trump himself asked to be expedited. This case demands equal haste. The clock is ticking.

Additional Resources

©2024 Protect Democracy Project