SCOTUS gives feds one week to answer Trump’s bid to delay trial

The US Supreme Court gave special counsel Jack Smith one week to file a response to Donald Trump’s bid to delay his election interference case on the grounds he should be immune from prosecution.

Lawyers for the former president had filed papers with the high court Monday seeking to continue the pause of the DC federal case against Trump, 77, for allegedly plotting to overturn the 2020 presidential election result.

In a very brief order Tuesday, US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts “requested” a response from Smith’s office in one week — by Feb. 20 at 5 p.m. — responding to Trump’s efforts to keep his presidential immunity defense alive after a loss in a lower appeals court earlier this month.

SCOTUS just last week heard arguments in a separate case by the GOP presidential frontrunner’s lawyers seeking to keep his name on the Colorado primary ballot — a request which the majority conservative justices seem inclined to grant.

Smith’s DC federal criminal case against the real-estate tycoon had been slated to go to trial March 4, but the trial judge scrapped the date and paused the case until the issue of presidential immunity was resolved on appeal.

Smith had previously sought to rush the case up to the Supreme Court in order to keep the trial date and prevent it from being postponed until after the general election in November. But the top prosecutor was dealt a setback when the high court declined to hear the case before a mid-level appeals court made its ruling.

That decision came Feb. 6, when the DC Court of Appeals found Trump does not enjoy complete immunity from prosecution.

Trump’s lawyers said in court papers Monday that if the high court allows a president to be charged it will set a dangerous precedent for future commanders-in-chief who will face the threat of politically motivated prosecution by opponents and who may let their fear of prosecution interfere with the job.

“This threat will hang like a millstone around every future President’s neck, distorting Presidential decisionmaking, undermining the President’s independence, and clouding the President’s ability” to handle official duties impartially and without fear, his lawyers wrote.

“Without immunity from criminal prosecution, the Presidency as we know it will cease to exist,” the filing said.