In a significant setback for special counsel Jack Smith, the Supreme Court has denied his request to expedite arguments on whether former President Donald Trump has immunity from federal prosecution for alleged crimes committed while in office. This decision is expected to delay Trump's trial, dealing a blow to the special counsel's efforts.

Smith had taken an unprecedented gamble by asking the justices to bypass the federal appeals court and swiftly address this fundamental issue in the election subversion criminal case against Trump. However, the court's refusal to fast-track the process constitutes a major victory for Trump, who has been employing a strategy of delay in the criminal case.

While both sides will still retain the option of appealing the ruling by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court, the immunity question must be resolved before the trial can proceed. An expedited review of the matter is already underway at the DC Circuit, with oral arguments scheduled for January 9. As of now, the election subversion trial is set to commence in March.

Trump's legal team strenuously argued against the case being heard by the Supreme Court, claiming that the special counsel was rushing the decision with "reckless abandon." They asserted that given the political nature of the case, caution should be exercised instead of haste.

Earlier this month, Trump's attorneys requested the appeals court to review the immunity ruling issued by District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is presiding over his criminal case. Chutkan had denied Trump's argument for the dismissal of the indictment, contending that his alleged actions to undermine the 2020 election results were not protected under presidential immunity.

While the appeal is ongoing, all procedural deadlines in the case have been halted by Judge Chutkan. However, Smith's legal team aimed to bypass the appeals court's review and sought immediate intervention from the Supreme Court. They underscored the imperative importance of promptly resolving the immunity claim, as Trump's trial is already scheduled to commence in less than three months.

Smith cited a precedent set during the Watergate era, where the Supreme Court bypassed an appeals court to swiftly address a case involving then-President Richard Nixon's claims of presidential privilege. In that case, the court ultimately rejected Nixon's claims in a subpoena dispute over Oval Office tapes. Smith argued that the stakes in the Trump case are just as high, if not higher, as the resolution of the immunity question is pivotal to whether the former president stands trial.

In response to Trump's accusations of being unfairly rushed to trial, Smith strongly stated that those claims are unfounded and incorrect. He emphasized that the grand jury followed the facts and applied the law, leading to Trump facing serious charges. The special counsel urged the Supreme Court to promptly address the immunity claim so that the charges can be resolved without delay, regardless of the outcome.

Additionally, prosecutors have requested the court to determine whether Trump is protected by double jeopardy. The defense argues that since Trump was acquitted by the Senate during his impeachment trial, he cannot face criminal prosecution for the same alleged actions.

As the legal battle continues, the resolution of these pivotal issues will shape the outcome of Trump's criminal case. The Supreme Court's refusal to expedite the immunity ruling has introduced a new delay in the already protracted legal proceedings, further extending the timeline for Trump's trial.