[ad_1]
The US government had claimed that the role of a grand jury in securing an indictment was an important check. However, Justice Alito claimed prosecutors could convince a grand jury to indict a “ham sandwich”.
During the session, the justices also discussed the idea of sending the immunity question back to lower courts for further fact-finding or potential narrowing of special counsel Jack Smith’s indictment.
Such a move would be a win for Mr Trump, who is trying to stall the case being tried before the Us presidential election on Nov 5.
Rick Hasen, a professor at UCLA School of Law, said although the Supreme Court’s final decision would likely lean towards the justice department “Trump is likely to get what he wants – a further delay of this election subversion case, maybe pushing it to after the election”.
The Supreme Court hearing came as Mr Trump sat in a lower Manhattan courtroom for the third day of his New York hush money trial, which may be the only criminal trial the former US president faces before voters go to the polls.
Mr Trump had asked to skip his New York criminal proceedings for the day so he could sit in on the high court’s special session, but his request to go to Washington was denied by Judge Juan Merchan.
“I think the Supreme Court has a very important argument before it today,” Mr Trump said outside the courtroom. “I should be there.”
The New York jury heard further testimony from Mr Trump’s old friend and former tabloid boss David Pecker.
Mr Pecker, who is not facing any charges, is accused of conspiring with Mr Trump and his former “fixer” Michael Cohen to “corrupt” the 2016 election by burying negative stories in the lead-up to the election.
[ad_2]
Source link