The Supreme Court has announced a special session to hear arguments regarding the possibility of prosecuting former President Donald Trump for his actions aimed at overturning the 2020 election results. The case, set to be argued on Thursday, stems from Trump's attempts to have charges against him dismissed. Lower courts have determined that Trump cannot claim immunity for actions that prosecutors argue sought to unlawfully interfere with the election outcome.

Trump, a Republican ex-president, is currently facing multiple criminal cases, including charges of conspiring to overturn the 2020 election. Another trial is underway in New York involving hush money payments made to a porn star to conceal an alleged sexual encounter. The Supreme Court's decision regarding Trump's ability to be prosecuted raises questions about whether there will be enough time to hold a trial before the November election, if the justices agree with the lower courts.

This case presents an unprecedented question for the Supreme Court, as no former president has previously faced criminal charges. Both sides in the case emphasize the absence of prior prosecutions to support their arguments. Trump's legal team argues that subjecting presidents to post-office criminal charges would impede their ability to function independently during their terms. On the other hand, special counsel Jack Smith's team contends that the lack of previous criminal charges highlights the extraordinary nature of the alleged misconduct.

The legal battle invokes the precedent of former President Richard Nixon, who resigned from office over the Watergate scandal to avoid impeachment. Trump's team references the 1982 Supreme Court case of Nixon v. Fitzgerald, which established absolute immunity for former presidents in civil cases related to their official actions. However, Smith's team argues that criminal laws hold substantially more weight and should not be subjected to the same immunity.

The timing of the immunity dispute is crucial, as Trump's lawyers seek to delay the trial on election interference while asserting his presidential immunity. This raises the concern that if Trump were to regain the presidency, he could order the Justice Department to drop the case. Prosecutors are pushing for a swift decision from the Supreme Court to allow the resumption of trial preparations, which could take up to three months after the court's ruling.

The Supreme Court, which includes three justices nominated by Trump, will hear the case. The presence of Justice Clarence Thomas, whose wife publicly supported efforts to overturn the 2020 election results and attended the rally before the Capitol riot, has sparked controversy. Calls have been made for Thomas to recuse himself from cases involving Trump and the events of January 6th. However, Thomas has chosen to participate in these cases, including the recent unanimous decision preventing states from excluding Trump from presidential ballots.

The Supreme Court's forthcoming ruling on Trump's potential criminal prosecution will shape the legal landscape surrounding presidential immunity and the post-office accountability of former presidents. The decision, expected in late June, may determine whether there is enough time to proceed with a trial before the November election. The case carries significant implications for the relationship between the presidency, the rule of law, and the possibility of criminal charges for acts committed while in office.