Skip to main content

The Supreme Court just handed Trump an astonishing victory

So much for the rule of law.

Former President Donald Trump speaks as Justice Neil Gorsuch looks on during a ceremony in the Rose Garden at the White House April 10, 2017, in Washington, DC.
Former President Donald Trump speaks as Justice Neil Gorsuch looks on during a ceremony in the Rose Garden at the White House April 10, 2017, in Washington, DC.
Former President Donald Trump speaks as Justice Neil Gorsuch looks on during a ceremony in the Rose Garden at the White House April 10, 2017, in Washington, DC.
Eric Thayer/Getty Images
Ian Millhiser
Ian Millhiser is a senior correspondent at Vox, where he focuses on the Supreme Court, the Constitution, and the decline of liberal democracy in the United States. He received a JD from Duke University and is the author of two books on the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that Trump’s DC criminal trial, the one concerning his attempt to steal the 2020 presidential election, must be delayed for at least another two months. The Court already effectively delayed his trial for an additional two and a half months in an order handed down last December.

This order is a colossal victory for Trump, and could potentially allow him to evade criminal responsibility for his attempts to overthrow the 2020 election altogether. Trump’s goal is to delay his trials until after Election Day. Should he prevail in that election, he can then order the Justice Department to drop all federal charges against him.

Trump was able to secure such an order from the justices by exploiting the fact that the federal judiciary ordinarily does not allow two different courts to have jurisdiction over the same case at the same time. So, when a party to a lawsuit or criminal proceeding appeals a trial court’s decision, the trial court often loses authority over that case until the appeal is resolved.

The ostensible reason for the Court’s order putting the trial on ice is that the Court needs that time to consider a weak appeal challenging a ruling by Judge Tanya Chutkan, the judge presiding over his DC criminal trial.

According to Trump, the Constitution forbids any prosecution of a former president for any “official acts” he engaged in while in office. The implications of this argument are astounding, and Trump’s lawyers haven’t exactly tried to hide them. During one court hearing, the former president’s lawyer told a judge that Trump could not be prosecuted even if he had ordered “SEAL Team 6 to assassinate a political rival,” unless Trump were also impeached and convicted by the Senate.

It’s hard to imagine the Supreme Court signing onto this argument, which has already been rejected by two other courts.

Yet Trump has now, with Wednesday’s ruling, leveraged this ridiculous legal argument to delay his DC trial for at least four and a half months, and the delay will likely extend much longer because the Court will need time to produce an opinion. The Court will hear oral arguments in late April.

Simply put, Wednesday’s order is a disaster for anyone hoping that Trump may face trial before the November election. And, because the nominal reason for this order is to give the justices more time to decide if the president is completely above the law, this decision raises serious doubts about whether this Court can be trusted to oversee Trump-related cases in a nonpartisan manner.

The First Amendment is in grave danger if Trump winsThe First Amendment is in grave danger if Trump wins
Supreme Court

Three Supreme Court justices want to drastically roll back the First Amendment. Trump could make it five.

By Ian Millhiser
Chuck Schumer’s ambitious plan to take the Supreme Court down a pegChuck Schumer’s ambitious plan to take the Supreme Court down a peg
Supreme Court

Schumer wants to engage in jurisdiction stripping, a rarely used tactic that can shrink the Supreme Court’s authority.

By Ian Millhiser
Biden’s new Supreme Court reform proposals are mostly uselessBiden’s new Supreme Court reform proposals are mostly useless
Supreme Court

The president is finally going after the high court, but his ideas are pretty weak.

By Ian Millhiser
A new Supreme Court case threatens to gut the Court’s one good trans rights decisionA new Supreme Court case threatens to gut the Court’s one good trans rights decision
Supreme Court

Republican Justice Neil Gorsuch surprised most Court watchers by supporting trans rights in Bostock v. Clayton County. We’re about to find out if he actually meant it.

By Ian Millhiser
Republicans ask the Supreme Court to gut student loan relief a second timeRepublicans ask the Supreme Court to gut student loan relief a second time
Supreme Court

The Court’s first decision blocking student loan forgiveness was a lawless mess.

By Ian Millhiser
Could Republicans sue to keep Biden on the ballot?Could Republicans sue to keep Biden on the ballot?
Supreme Court

Speaker Mike Johnson’s threat to challenge Vice President Harris’s nomination in court should be frivolous. But who knows with this Supreme Court?

By Ian Millhiser