The Supreme Court’s landmark ruling Monday that former President Donald Trump is shielded from prosecution for some actions he took in his push to overturn the 2020 presidential election complicated the outlook for the remaining criminal cases against him and all but foreclosed the possibility he will stand trial again before Election Day.

But the court’s 6-3 decision, which split along ideological lines, left open the prospect that the former president could still end up facing a jury.

Here’s what to know about the historic decision:

How did we get here?

The case before the justices was an election subversion case filed by special counsel Jack Smith in Washington, D.C., alleging that Trump broke several federal laws as he sought to stay in power in 2020.

Prosecutors have accused Trump of actions including assembling slates of fraudulent presidential electors, enlisting the Justice Department to legitimize his false claims of voter fraud, and pressuring state officials and Vice President Mike Pence to overturn President Joe Biden’s victory.

Trump argued that many of the steps he took were part of his official duties to ensure the integrity of elections and that, as a former president, he is entitled to absolute immunity for all actions taken while in office.

Smith, meanwhile, maintained that granting Trump such blanket immunity would run counter to the principles on which the nation was founded and essentially elevate presidents above the law.

What did the Supreme Court say?

The court’s decision Monday granted Trump substantial — but not absolute — immunity from criminal charges, noting the threat of future prosecution could chill a president’s ability to do the job.

...continued

©2024 The Philadelphia Inquirer. Visit inquirer.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.