In a significant development, a federal appeals panel has declared that former President Donald Trump can be tried on charges related to allegations of plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 election. This ruling sharply rejects Trump's claims of immunity from prosecution and paves the way for further legal challenges that may cause additional delays in the case.

The landmark prosecution, which had been effectively stalled for weeks during the court's consideration of the appeal, regained momentum with the panel's unanimous decision. However, the one-month gap between the oral arguments and the ruling has raised uncertainties about the timing of the trial, particularly in this election year, as the initial trial date of March 4 was canceled by the presiding judge.

Trump's legal team has vowed to appeal the ruling, potentially leading to further delays in the case. If the Supreme Court agrees to take up the appeal, the trial could be postponed by weeks or months. The appeals panel has given Trump a week to seek the Supreme Court's involvement.

The eventual trial date holds immense political significance, as the special counsel's team aims to prosecute Trump this year while the former president, who is currently the Republican front-runner, seeks to delay it until after the November election. If Trump were to win the presidency, he could potentially use his executive power to dismiss the cases or seek a self-pardon.

This unanimous ruling by the appeals panel marks the second instance since December where judges have affirmed that Trump can be prosecuted for actions taken during his presidency and leading up to the storming of the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.

The court's opinion emphasizes that former presidents, including Trump, do not enjoy absolute immunity for actions falling within their official duties. It states that "former President Trump has become citizen Trump, with all of the defenses of any other criminal defendant." The judges assert that the public interest in holding individuals accountable for criminal acts outweighs any potential risk of inhibiting presidential actions. They firmly assert that no former occupant of the presidency is above the law.

Trump's spokesperson announced his intention to appeal the ruling to safeguard the presidency and the Constitution. In a post on Truth Social, Trump maintained his stance that a president must have full immunity in order to effectively carry out their duties for the benefit of the country.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit played a central role in this immunity dispute, with the Supreme Court previously temporarily staying out of the matter in December. The Supreme Court may still decide to act on Trump's appeal, but until then, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan can proceed with the trial proceedings. The Supreme Court is likely to seek input from the special counsel before determining whether to maintain the legal rulings against Trump.

There is no specific timeline for the Supreme Court to act, and the justices may set their own deadlines for reaching a final decision. Trump's lawyers have argued that presidents are immune from both civil and criminal liability for official acts. However, the special counsel's team contends that no such immunity exists in the U.S. Constitution or in previous cases, and that Trump's actions were not part of his official duties.

Apart from the charges related to the election plot, Trump also faces federal charges in Florida for allegedly illegally retaining classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate. He also faces charges in Georgia and New York for activities related to the 2020 election and hush money payments made to Stormy Daniels. Trump has consistently denied any wrongdoing in all these cases.