The Supreme Court recently ruled that former President Donald Trump does have some measure of presidential immunity for actions taken in his official capacity as president. This ruling has roiled the ongoing criminal cases against Trump, as prosecutors scramble to plan their next moves and Trump's defense team plans a series of countermoves.
...
Will Chamberlain, senior counsel with the Article III project, told Blaze News that the special counsel case against Trump would likely be "delayed for years" as a result of the ruling.
"It's not just because the Supreme Court reversed and sent it back down for a hearing at the district court," Chamberlain explained. "The way that the Supreme Court has dealt with this, is said, 'The only question that we're going to resolve now: Is there such a thing as presidential immunity for official acts? Yes.' But the contours of what that immunity looks like and how it applies to specific facts in the indictment, none of that has been settled by the Supreme Court."
"I think we're looking at years of litigation," he said.
...
Chamberlain told Blaze News that he anticipated the Supreme Court would grant Trump some presidential immunity, but he "didn't expect them to make such a broad holding when it came to evidence of official acts being admissible, even in cases where the official acts themselves are not being charged in the indictment."
"The end result here is, I think President Trump's going to win, in which case, obviously, this prosecution will be just dropped on day one of his presidency," Chamberlain continued. "I think the Georgia case against President Trump is now fatally flawed. And there's a big question about whether or not some of the other people in the Georgia indictment — people like Jeff Clark, who is the assistant attorney general — if their cases also need to be dismissed because evidence of official acts was included."
...
Chamberlain called the Supreme Court's opinion "a very, very good holding for President Trump," adding that "there's a very good shot that the judge in New York will have to declare a mistrial. There won't even be a sentencing."
"I mean, if he's [Merchan] going to follow the law, he's probably going to have to declare a mistrial," he told Blaze News. "The other problem for Judge Merchan and Alvin Bragg is that the verdict form was not specific."
Chamberlain explained that some verdict forms include an interrogatory format that lists various questions posed to jurors, but "apparently that wasn't done in New York."
"That's another reason I think a mistrial is likely there," he told Blaze News. "The immunity holding, and especially the component that says you can't even include evidence of it — it throws a wrench into all the plans to try to get Trump on this lawfare."
...
Read the full article HERE.
