In a case that could shape the future of presidential power and accountability, the Supreme Court is poised to determine whether former President Donald Trump is immune from prosecution for actions taken while in office. However, legal analysts suggest that the timing and framing of the case may have more immediate consequences, potentially delaying Trump's federal trial on charges of trying to subvert the 2020 election results until after this year's presidential election.

The Supreme Court's decision to hear the case and schedule arguments for Thursday, rather than uphold a unanimous appeals court decision allowing Trump's trial, raises concerns that the trial court judge will face additional challenges. The indictments against Trump by the special counsel involve a mix of official conduct and private acts, meaning that the high court's ruling will likely require further fact-finding by the trial court before the proceedings can continue.

Should the Supreme Court rule that Trump can be prosecuted, it could significantly impact the timeline of the trial, potentially making it impossible to complete before the election. This has raised speculation that if Trump is reelected, he may seek to have the Justice Department drop the federal charges against him, further complicating the legal proceedings.

While the Supreme Court has generally been unsympathetic to Trump's claims of immunity in the past, it is expected that some justices, including Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr., Elena Kagan, and Brett M. Kavanaugh, who have White House or Justice Department backgrounds, may be cautious about setting precedent that could restrict future presidents' actions.

Legal experts argue that the outcome of this case has far-reaching implications beyond Trump's presidency. The ruling will establish a clear line regarding a president's powers and limitations, impacting future presidential administrations. The question at hand is whether a former president enjoys immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during their tenure or if private actions should be subject to prosecution.

Special counsel Jack Smith has charged Trump with four felonies related to his alleged plan to overturn Joe Biden's 2020 presidential victory. The charges include conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiring to obstruct the certification of Biden's win in Congress, obstructing a congressional proceeding, and conspiracy against voting rights.

The Supreme Court's phrasing of the case suggests they may be interested in distinguishing between a president's official acts and private conduct, potentially granting some level of immunity for official duties. With six conservative justices on the court, many observers will be closely monitoring concerns raised about restricting future presidents' actions.

As the Supreme Court hears the arguments on Thursday, it is anticipated that both Trump's legal team and federal prosecutors are preparing for additional legal battles depending on the outcome of the decision. There is a possibility that the case could be sent back to U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan for further examination of Trump's specific allegations and the Supreme Court's ruling's applicability. This could result in further delays and subsequent appeals in the D.C. Circuit and potentially the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court's ruling, which may come before the end of the term in late June or early July, will undoubtedly shape the landscape of presidential power and accountability for future occupants of the White House. The decision will have implications far beyond Donald Trump and will be closely scrutinized for its impact on the presidency going forward.