Supreme Court justices heard oral arguments in the case that will determine if a president has immunity from criminal prosecution, brought by Donald Trump in an attempt to dismiss his federal election interference case.
Arguments, which lasted roughly three and a half hours, began heated with the majority of the conservative arm of the court toying with the idea of awarding presidents some form of immunity from criminal charges. Some expressed concern that presidents could face politically motivated prosecution, others worried it would impede a president’s ability to do their job.
Most of the court, notably the liberal justices and Justice Amy Coney Barrett, appeared skeptical of awarding presidents, and Mr Trump, broad absolute immunity.
Should the court rule narrowly on immunity, it could send Mr Trump’s appeal back to a lower court for further litigation – potentially delaying the federal election interference trial.
Thursday’s arguments stem from the indictment brought against Mr Trump by Justice Department Special Counsel Jack Smith regarding his attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
Mr Trump did not attend arguments as he is required to be in New York for the latest installment of his hush money trial.