A group of over a dozen retired four-star generals, admirals, and other former military leaders has filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court, arguing against former President Trump's claims of immunity in his criminal cases. The group contends that granting immunity to Trump would not only undermine the military's role in American society but also pose significant threats to the nation's constitutional order and national security.

In their amicus brief, the retired military leaders state that Trump's claims would have profoundly negative effects on military service members. The former president's attorneys have argued that the charges against Trump related to the January 6th attack on the Capitol should be dismissed because he was acting as president at the time. However, prosecutors have dismissed this argument as a "novel and sweeping" claim.

The signatories of the brief include notable figures such as former CIA Director Michael Hayden, retired Admiral Thad Allen, and retired Generals George Casey, Carlton Fulford, Craig McKinley, and Charles Krulak. The group argues that granting Trump immunity could set a dangerous precedent, potentially allowing future executive intervention in the country's elections and jeopardizing national security.

According to the brief, immunity for the former president would not only undermine the peaceful transition of power but also put the entire country at risk. In a time when anti-democratic authoritarian regimes are on the rise worldwide, such a threat is deemed intolerable and dangerous. Foreign countries closely observe American elections, and domestic conflict surrounding the peaceful transition of power only encourages foreign adversaries, further risking national security.

Moreover, the group highlights the potential breakdown of the relationship between the commander-in-chief and the military if Trump was granted immunity. While the president would not have to follow the law, the military would still be obligated to do so. This scenario could place service members in a challenging position, having to choose between following their commander-in-chief or obeying the laws enacted by Congress.

The retired officers also express concern that any change in the assumption of immunity could erode public trust in the military as an institution. The group emphasizes the urgency of considering the implications of Trump's immunity claims, especially with the Supreme Court set to begin arguments on April 25th. The landmark decision is expected to be handed down by the end of June or sooner.

Additionally, Trump's federal election subversion case, facing four felony counts, is currently on hold as the Supreme Court weighs the immunity challenge. Critics of the former president argue that his immunity push is a tactic to delay his trial until after the November election, further fueling political controversy.

As the legal proceedings unfold, the outcome of the Supreme Court's decision regarding immunity claims will have far-reaching implications for the relationship between the military and the commander-in-chief, as well as for the nation's security and democratic processes.

(Note: The generated article provides a summary of the information provided by the user. It does not include any additional context or analysis beyond what was mentioned in the provided information.