Here's what you need to know about Trump's immunity claim heading to Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has scheduled a special session to hear arguments about whether former President Donald Trump can face prosecution for his attempts to overturn the 2020 election results. This case stems from Trump’s efforts to dismiss charges against him, with lower courts ruling that he cannot claim immunity for actions that interfered with the election. The Supreme Court has fast-tracked this case, but timing is crucial as it may impact the trial before the November election. Both sides are invoking past legal precedents, like Nixon v. Fitzgerald, to support their arguments about presidential immunity and the unprecedented nature of the charges against Trump.

The key issue at hand is whether a former president is immune from criminal prosecution for actions taken during their tenure. Trump’s lawyers argue that without immunity, presidents may be hindered in office, while the prosecution notes the lack of prior criminal charges against former presidents. Nixon’s legacy is being brought into the case, with references to previous legal decisions and President Ford’s pardon of Nixon. The timing of the trial is critical, as both sides seek to either delay or expedite proceedings based on the outcome of the Supreme Court’s decision.

Trump’s legal team, led by D. John Sauer, has a history of high-profile cases, including challenging Biden’s victory in 2020. Michael Dreeben, representing the prosecution, is a seasoned Justice Department official who has argued numerous cases at the court. The composition of the Supreme Court bench, including three justices nominated by Trump, adds complexity to the case, especially with Justice Clarence Thomas’s involvement being scrutinized due to his wife’s ties to the events surrounding the Capitol riot in 2021. This case poses unprecedented legal questions about presidential immunity and the consequences of post-presidential actions on criminal prosecution.