Paul welcome to the journal editorial report, im paul gigot. The Supreme Court on wednesday agreed to decide whether former President Donald Trump should be immune from prosecution in his federal election interference case. Dealing a blow to special counsel jack smiths effort to try the former president and likely 2024 republican nominee before with no. Oral arguments are now set for late april with a decision expected by late june. A timetable that could push the trial originally set to begin this monday close to election day and possibly beyond. For more on the political and legal implications of the justices decision to take the case, im join ised by Wall Street Journal columnists Dan Henninger, kim strassel and bill mcif gun. So, bill, the bill mcgurn. If Supreme Court didnt have to take this case the Supreme Court didnt have to take this case, and theres an argument for dodging it because they could have let a d. C. Circuit opinion that denied immunity stand. Now they take this, t
[ no audio ] [ no audio ] pables to my wash. Now ill be smelling fresh all day long. [sniff] still fresh. [ no audio ] try for under 5 hey, grab more delectables. You know, that lickable cat treat . Delickable delectables . Yes, just hurry. Hmm. It must be delicious. [narrator] this is my coffee shop. Delectables lickable treat. We just moved into a bigger space, brought on another employee, and ordered new branded gear for the team. It was so easy. I just chose my products, added our logo, and placed my order. Bring your own Team Together with custom gear. Get started today at customink. Com. Lets try that again. Hi, everybody. Just after 4 00 in new york now. Were sorry about that. We have some technical difficulties. We start again though. With the news that broke on capitol hill. And that is one Mitch Mcconnell. Who ended his tenure today as the longest serving Senate Leader in history. Hell be gone in a few monthsm but well live with his legacy for a very long time. The question b
What do they want to hear . Or is it potentially that they just want to be the ones to hear it. The lead on writing a definitive ruling on something as foundational as whether this president , any president , is above the law. But you cant separate that motivation from the timing. Why did it take so long for the justices to decide to hear it . And why will it take so long for them to actually hear it. The court has worked faster before, including on Hearing Arguments regarding the colorado ballot. Again, the timing here matters. Not just for this case, which is now unlikely to be tried before election day, but Donald Trumps other cases as well. The classified documents at maralago, maybe even georgia, if that case ever even gets off the ground. Or the arguments regarding the colorado decision to remove trump from the ballot. Theres so much to consider. The motivation, the political effect on november, and the future of the court itself. How much public trust can it stand to lose before
We start with this fox news alert. We have major Breaking News in the trump legal saga. The u. S. Supreme court has agreed to hear his immunity claim. That would set arguments for the week of april 22. This is huge, a decision that is likely to come in late june. So will joe bidens weaponized Department Of Justice insist on a trial . Lets see. The month that the Republican National convention is to take place . That close to a president ial election . Now, also breaking tonight, an illinois judge has removed President Trump from the states primary ballot citing an Insurrection Ban joining maine and colorado. We have a lot to breakdown tonight. Here to help us, Jonathan Turley is with us, fox news contributor. Lets start with the immunity case. I always felt it was the right thing for the court to take up, but i never had the confidence that they would. Theyre expediting this. Arguments will be made in late april. Probably wont get a decision until late june. That butts up until july, t
and the case and expose them to threats. in a legal filing split on thursday, smith said cannon applied the wrong legal standard when she ordered the unsealing of documents and she needed to reconsider to prevent manifest injustice, endangering witnesses by revealing their identities. well, late last night, after reading that motion, canyon road smith needs to hand over documents anyway, and again, but today. we have several correspondents and analysts in place covering today s new developments for you. joining me now we have katie phang, an attorney and host of the proceeding show, the katie phang show here on msnbc. and investigator for the january 6th. katie, bring us up to speed on what this dispute between cannon and smith is all about. there are certain parts of the discovery process to happen in a criminal case and during the discovery process, there is and change of information. in fact mar-a-lago, because it s a classified documents case, it s governed by somet