Former President Donald Trump and his lawyers were dealt an unfortunate legal blow by a liberal-leaning federal appeals court regarding his immunity defense.
Trump has since vowed to take the issue to the U.S. Supreme Court.
But according to Breitbart, some, including retired Federal Judge J. Michael Luttig, believe that the high court will ultimately let the lower court's decision stand.
It should be noted that Luttig and a group of anti-Trump Republicans filed an amicus brief with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals arguing that Trump is not immune. He has also insisted that Trump incited an "insurrection" on Jan. 6, 2021.
Luttig, during an interview this week with MSNBC’s “Deadline," argued why he believes the Supreme Court will ultimately not get involved in the matter.
His comments came in the wake of the appeals court's decision, which was celebrated widely by the left and anti-Trump Republicans.
"Today’s decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit was historic. It’s a landmark decision holding that a former president is never immune from federal prosecution for offenses committed against the united states when he or she was President of the United States," Luttig said.
Retired conservative federal judge Michael Luttig on the appeals court ruling:
“If there’s one single instance in which he or she is not immune, it is where as here with the former president, he or she attempted to remain in power in violation of the executive vesting clause of… pic.twitter.com/SQyfghbXNV
— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) February 7, 2024
Luttig continued, "I do not expect the Supreme Court to review that decision by the D.C . Circuit. in the D.C. circuit case, a number of my friends and former colleagues in six Republican administrations prior to the Trump administration filed an amicus brief with the D.C. Circuit court of appeals in which we argued that a president is never immune from federal prosecution for offenses committed while he was president."
"But if there’s one single instance in which he or she is not immune, it is where as here with the former president, he or she attempted to remain in power in violation of the executive vesting clause of the constitution preventing the peaceful transfer of power and denying his successor in this instance President Joe Biden the powers of the presidency to which he had rightfully become entitled."
The former president's camp immediately vowed to appeal the lower court's ruling.
"If immunity is not granted to a President, every future President who leaves office will be immediately indicted by the opposing party. Without complete immunity, a President of the United States would not be able to properly function!” said Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung.
Cheung added, "Deranged Jack Smith’s prosecution of President Trump for his Presidential, official acts is unconstitutional under the doctrine of Presidential Immunity and the Separation of Powers."
Only time will tell if the high court rules differently on the matter. It'll be fascinating to watch.
