There are only a few moments on the 2024 election calendar that could potentially shake up what has been a very stagnant presidential race. A Donald Trump criminal conviction was one of them. It didn’t change the polls. The first debate has happened, and while it is clear who lost the night, it remains unclear if it meaningfully changed the race. Trump’s selection of a vice-presidential candidate could be an inflection point.
But another thing both Republicans and Democrats were waiting for was the Supreme Court’s decision on whether Trump, or any president, has blanket civil or criminal immunity for anything they do while in office.
In a 6-3 vote along partisan lines announced on Monday, the court essentially said two things: first, the president has immunity for official acts but not for unofficial ones. Second, it’s up to the lower court to decide which actions were official and unofficial.
Of course, the court was only taking up the question because Trump had been charged in August with four counts relating to his actions leading up to the January 6th attack on the Capitol, marking the first time the nation did not have a peaceful transition of power.
Before a trial even took place, Trump’s attorneys argued that presidents have wide immunity from criminal prosecution for anything they do in office. They even argued this included ordering the assassination of a political opponent.
While the ruling may seem a bit muddled, the reaction from both campaigns might tell the bigger picture. Trump’s team was thrilled that, logistically speaking, Trump may not face a federal trial involving his role on January 6th before the election, dominating headlines. Biden’s campaign had a largely muted response, noting that Trump would do anything necessary for the Supreme Court to weigh in, which they argued is proof of the clear choice in this election.
There are three big takeaways from the decision:
The immunity question is now irrelevant as it relates to the 2024 election.
If this decision was closely watched because it could move the needle, we now have the answer: it won’t. This was not a decision with obvious political implications. Democrats could argue that this isbad for democracy, but those who agree with that sentiment are probably already in Biden’s camp. Those who disagree are likely already supporting Trump. But logistically this decision nearly ensures there will not be weeks of a trial in the heat of the campaign, something that might have influenced the sliver of undecided voters.
Trump’s legal strategy is to delay. In this case, it worked.
Trump has enough money and lawyers to appeal everything and challenge every bit of the process in an effort to delay cases from the beginning. He did that in this case, which had been set to go to trial in the spring. This decision, on the last day of the court’s term, basically guarantees no trial will go forward before the election. Even if a lower court determines his actions involving January 6th were fair game for prosecution, the Supreme Court ruling on Monday makes it clear Trump’s team can appeal and delay further past Election Day.
The decision emboldens what Trump might try in a second term.
Trump didn’t need the Supreme Court to greenlight anything he might try to do in a second term – including prosecuting political opponents – but the court decision could easily erase any pushback he might have received from advisors.
In his first term, there was a lot of reporting about what his White House legal counsels advised he could and could not do as president. Specifically, White House lawyers were clear about where he could be exposed to criminal charges. Now, those future discussions, should he win the White House again, will be about how he can fold any of the more personal or political items he wants to pursue into the purview of so-called official acts.
In the broadest terms, the presidency also had a concept of immunity built in, but it was never resolved how far that immunity could go. Now, with this decision, at least in the near term, will be the job of the lower courts.
James Pindell is a Globe political reporter who reports and analyzes American politics, especially in New England.