In a latest development, lawyers representing former President Donald Trump have appealed to the Supreme Court, requesting a temporary halt to a ruling that denied Trump's claim of immunity in a federal election interference case. The three-judge panel in the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. unanimously rejected Trump's argument that he cannot be prosecuted for official acts performed during his presidency. Special counsel Jack Smith accuses Trump of conspiring to defraud the U.S. and obstruct Congress.

The appeal, filed on Monday, seeks to pause the ruling that dismissed Trump's claim of immunity from criminal charges related to his alleged attempts to overturn his loss in the 2020 presidential election. Trump's attorneys argue that "without immunity from criminal prosecution, the Presidency as we know it will cease to exist."

The federal appeals court panel had initially granted Trump's lawyers time to file an appeal to the Supreme Court, temporarily withholding the effect of their ruling. In their application for a pause to the case, Trump's defense lawyers urged the high court to prevent an unprecedented departure from ordinary appellate procedures and allow Trump's claim of immunity to be decided through the regular course of justice.

Should the Supreme Court grant the request, the case will remain on hold until a decision is made. The nine-member Supreme Court, which includes three justices appointed by Trump, will assign Chief Justice John Roberts, nominated by former President George W. Bush, to handle matters arising from Washington, D.C.

Trump has actively sought to delay multiple criminal and civil cases while simultaneously running for the Republican presidential nomination. Last week's ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals, upholding a lower court's decision denying Trump's claim of "absolute" presidential immunity, dealt a blow to his efforts to dismiss the election interference case led by special counsel Jack Smith.

The appellate judges clarified that Trump, as a former president, stands as a citizen and can now rely on the standard defenses available to any criminal defendant. They further emphasized that executive immunity, which may have protected Trump during his presidency, does not shield him from prosecution in this case.

Trump's legal team has argued that the Constitution's separation-of-powers principle prevents the courts from reviewing a president's official acts and that immunity is necessary to preserve the proper functioning of the Executive Branch. However, the appeals court firmly rejected these arguments, asserting that Trump's stance would undermine the system of separated powers.

In addition to the election interference case, Trump is facing multiple criminal charges, including conspiracy to defraud the U.S. and obstruct Congress. He has pleaded not guilty to these charges, claiming they are part of a larger political conspiracy by the Biden administration.

As the legal battle continues, Trump's appeal to the Supreme Court amplifies the significance of the case. The nation's highest court will now decide whether to intervene and provide clarity on the issue of presidential immunity in criminal proceedings.