The US Supreme Court has helped Donald Trump

The US Supreme Court’s decision to hear Donald Trump’s appeal for blanket immunity could change the nature of this year’s election. His trial for allegedly trying to reverse the 2020 result was originally meant to start next Monday. Now it is likely to be delayed until autumn. The odds of a verdict before voters go to the polls in November look increasingly slim. This is the latest, and most significant, in a series of Supreme Court moves that appear to be aimed at delaying Trump’s trial for as long as possible. Since timing is critical to a case that could have a big influence on what voters decide, the effect will be to tilt the playing field towards Trump.

Nobody denies that the wheels of justice should be allowed to take their course. In this case, however, the court has repeatedly dragged out the process. In December it declined a request from Jack Smith, the special counsel in charge of Trump’s prosecution, to expedite his immunity hearing. The justices said that his appeal against going to trial should first be heard by the US district appeals court.

That court issued a unanimous and scathing ruling against Trump’s argument of total presidential immunity in early February. The high court justices then took another 16 days to decide that they should hear his appeal against that ruling.

The court could have chosen to hear the oral arguments next week, as Smith requested — and as the urgency of the question demands. Instead, they will not hear the case until April 22, which was the last possible date in their term. This means that their ruling may not be published until as late as July.

Further complicating the timetable is a Department of Justice rule that precludes politically material cases from being heard within 60 days of an election. Even assuming the justices deny that Trump has immunity from criminal acts while he was president, the delay could kill the case. If Trump wins in November, he could postpone the trial until after he has left office.

To be clear, the justices can choose whatever timetable suits them. At the request of Trump’s legal team, the court agreed to expedite his appeal against a ruling of the Colorado Supreme Court that struck him off the state’s primary ballot. The Colorado decision was based on section three of the 14th amendment, which debars officers of the US from holding office if they have “engaged in insurrection”. In that case, the conservative majority saw the logic of an urgent hearing.

Likewise, the court’s controversial Bush vs Gore ruling that stopped the ballot count and settled the 2000 presidential election in favour of George W Bush was issued a day after the court heard the oral arguments. When the court wants to act fast, it does — and this argument is as pressing as any the court has faced in recent history. It could shape the future of the republic.

Few legal brains have any doubt about the final outcome to the immunity case. There is no basis in the US constitution or in any statute to say that a president can do what he likes without fear of liability. Trump’s lawyers even argued that their interpretation of presidential immunity meant a president could use the Navy Seal Team 6 to assassinate political rivals. Even this Supreme Court is almost certain to give such a chilling argument the response it deserves.

The real question is how long it will take them to do so. Having no substantive basis to stop the trial from going ahead, the former president’s legal team is playing for time. The fact that a majority of Supreme Court justices are apparently willing to go along with that is a matter of the gravest concern. In this case, justice delayed would be justice denied.