By Grace Hamilton, Opinions & Editorials Editor

A three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (D.C.) has rejected former President Donald Trump’s argument that he cannot be charged for crimes committed while he held office. Trump has not asked the Supreme Court to reverse the ruling but has asked for a further delay in his lawsuits going to court. 

The ruling pertains to the case against Trump for allegedly plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 election against President Joe Biden, ultimately resulting in the riots on the Capitol that occurred on Jan. 6, 2021. 

The decision was unanimous among the three judges —  one of whom was nominated by Trump  —  and found that his statements about the 2020 election to his supporters were made in his position as a candidate, not in his official office as president.

The Justice Department’s special counsel Jack Smith has urged the Supreme Court to reject Trump’s request to further delay the trial against him which has been on hold since Dec. 2023. 

Last year, Trump was indicted on four felony charges: conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding and conspiracy against rights. 

These charges were made on the prosecutors claims that, in between the 2020 presidential election and the Jan. 6 riot, Trump encouraged local election officials to overturn voting results in their respective states, pushed former Vice President Mike Pence to stop the certification of electoral votes and maintained that the election was stolen by the Democratic party. 

The trial against Trump had been scheduled to take place on March 4 but was delayed while the lower appellate courts decided whether or not the former president could be considered immune to the charges against him. 

The court’s ruling holds historic significance, as it was  the first time an appeals court answered a question as to the level of accountability that presidents can be held to for what they do while serving in the executive office. 

If the Supreme Court were to overturn the appellate court’s decision, it would create “terrifying possibilities” for future presidents and the usage of military force to maintain office, a group of anti-Trump Republicans claims. 

The group, made up of 26 former U.S. Department of Justice attorneys, lawmakers and other formerly elected officials penned an amicus curiae brief to the Supreme Court opposing the delay in Trump’s trial.

“No Court should create a presidential immunity from federal criminal prosecution, even for official acts, that is so vast that it endangers the peaceful transfer of executive power,” the group stated in the brief.

In an application sent to the Supreme Court on Feb. 12 which did not request an appeal, Trump’s lawyers stated, “Without immunity from criminal prosecution, the Presidency as we know it will cease to exist.” 

In the meantime, at least three lawsuits against Trump are moving forward to the next phase — that of a limited gathering of evidence. These lawsuits were brought forward by members of Congress and police officers affected by the Jan. 6 Capitol riots. They were brought forward in 2021 but had been delayed over Trump’s claims of immunity being decided in the courts.

Last week, the Supreme Court heard over two hours of arguments as to whether they should uphold or overturn a ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court which decided that Trump cannot appear on the 2024 ballot because of his role in Jan. 6 — a role that they believe establishes him as an insurrectionist.

For now, the D.C. court’s decision will stand as Trump and his legal team missed the deadline to file for an appeal to the Supreme Court. His team argues that he will continue to fight for presidential immunity, with many thinking that he will try for an appeal after this next phase of evidence-gathering is finished.