President Trump attends appeals court over immunity from 2020 election interference case

What happens next?

Lawrence Hurley supreme court reporter

Courts are hearing cases on an expedited schedule, so a decision could be reached quickly. In either case, the losing party will likely immediately appeal to the Supreme Court. The judge will then face a decision on whether to take up the case and issue his own ruling, which could happen quickly.

However, the Supreme Court does not have to take up the case and can leave the appellate court’s decision unchanged. If Trump loses on appeal and the Supreme Court declines to hear his case, the trial could still proceed quickly.

President Trump plans to leave court and give speech at nearby hotel

jake trailer Reporting from Iowa.

Trump left the courthouse without saying anything to reporters. His campaign spokesman Stephen Chan said he was expected to speak at a local hotel soon.

Walt Nauta is in court.

rebecca shabad I’m in Washington DC

Walt Nauta was in the courtroom next to his attorney, Stan Woodward.

Mr. Nauta is being indicted by the Office of the Special Counsel in the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case against Mr. Trump, which is not the case at issue today.

Pearce warns of ‘terrifying future’

Dale Gregorian

Mr. Pierce expressed concern about what would happen if the courts went along with Mr. Trump’s argument for complete immunity from criminal prosecution related to official conduct.

“Frankly, I think Judge Pan’s hypothetical is, as I understood my friend over here saying, what if, for example, the president orders the SEALs to assassinate political opponents and then resigns? , what kind of world are we living in? “Before impeachment? That’s not a crime. Will the president sell his pardon, resign, or not be impeached? That’s not a crime,” Pierce said. .

“I think that’s a very frightening future. If you’re talking about balance of interests and weighing, I think that should be very important in the court’s consideration.”

discussion ends

Lawrence Hurley supreme court reporter

After a little more than an hour, the court concluded its arguments.

Pan asks whether the main point of the appeal is whether President Trump’s interpretation of the impeachment verdict is correct.

rebecca shabad I’m in Washington DC

The appeal is largely based on the correct interpretation of President Trump’s impeachment ruling, as Judge Pan acknowledged that the president could be prosecuted under certain circumstances (such as impeachment and conviction by Congress). He said that it boils down to whether or not.

“So if he’s right, and the articles of impeachment include the impeachment-first rule, then he wins. If he’s wrong and the articles of impeachment include the impeachment-first rule, then he wins.” If we think the rules are not included, then he loses,” Pan said.

Pierce says he agrees with her characterization.

Pierce concludes:Trump’s lawyers are currently responding.

ginger gibson washington senior editor

Mr. Sauer has indicated that he is once again responding to Mr. Pearce’s claims.

This is happening faster than many thought.

Pierce says impeachment and prosecution are separate processes

rebecca shabad I’m in Washington DC

Pierce maintains that impeachment and prosecution are separate processes.

Pearce says impeachment is a political process, but he insists there is also a legal process and it is not political.

He said the legal process had safeguards in place that some members of the court had already mentioned. For example, prosecutors are expected to follow strict norms and behave in an orderly manner, he said.

Pierce says ‘unprecedented’ nature of Trump’s actions warrants prosecution of him

ginger gibson washington senior editor

Pierce said Trump’s indictment should not be seen as evidence that the “floodgates” will open for politically motivated prosecutions.

“The fact that this investigation (resulting in charges) does not reflect a significant change in retaliatory retaliation in the future,” Pearce said. “I think this reflects the fundamentally unprecedented nature of these criminal charges: that a sitting president used the levers of power to fundamentally undermine our democratic republic and our electoral system. The allegations have never been made before, and frankly, if this type of fact pattern were to occur again, I think it would be very scary if we didn’t have some mechanism to get to it criminally.”