In a recent development in the 2020 election subversion case against former President Donald Trump, a federal judge, Tanya Chutkan, raised concerns that the former president's attorneys were deliberately trying to stall any action until after the election. Judge Chutkan made her remarks during a heated hour-long hearing aimed at determining the next steps in the case.

This was the first hearing held since the Supreme Court ruled that presidents have absolute immunity from prosecution while carrying out their core constitutional powers. Trump's lawyers vehemently opposed the proposal put forth by U.S. prosecutors to resume the proceedings by allowing the government to present evidence of potential criminal conduct by Trump.

According to the defense, such a move would be "fundamentally unfair" and in conflict with the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity. Trump's legal team argued that the government should not be allowed to proceed with the presentation until the issue of immunity was resolved.

Judge Chutkan firmly stated that the upcoming election was not a factor in her decision-making process and urged Trump's lawyers to focus on the substance of the court proceedings rather than any political agendas. She expressed her concern that the defense's approach appeared to be an effort to delay action in the case.

The judge's comments shed light on the tense atmosphere during the hearing, as both sides vehemently defended their positions. The defense team emphasized the significance of the Supreme Court's ruling, asserting that any attempts to bypass the immunity protection would be a severe violation of Trump's rights.

Prosecutors, on the other hand, argued that determining the potential criminal conduct was necessary for the case to move forward. They contended that the Supreme Court's ruling did not provide absolute immunity against investigation but rather protected the president from prosecution for actions taken as part of their constitutional duties.

The hearing ended without a final decision on the proposed presentation by the government. Judge Chutkan instructed both parties to submit additional briefs addressing the issue of immunity and how it relates to the case.

As the legal battle continues, the focus remains on whether Trump's conduct regarding the 2020 election can still be considered criminal and whether the immunity granted to presidents for their official actions extends to this particular case. The next steps in the proceedings will be determined based on further arguments and submissions from both sides.