Key Trump delay tactic 'hamstrung' by D.C. appeal court ruling: analysis

Former President Donald Trump's efforts to delay his federal election interference case were effectively "hamstrung" by an appeal court ruling slapping down his presidential immunity defense, according to a new analysis.

The three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit not only ruled Trump is not immune from criminal charges tied to the Jan. 6 riots, but also made it easier for Judge Tanya Chutkan to restart stayed court procedures, argues the Washington Post's Aaron Blake.

"They put their ruling on hold only until Monday, and it would remain on hold only if Trump appeals to the Supreme Court," writes Blake. "That effectively means he could ask for an en banc review by the full appeals court first, but that wouldn’t prevent Judge Tanya Chutkan from pressing forward."

Blake contends that the panel's unanimous decision "served notice that it wasn’t a particularly close call."

Also read: 'Lied under oath in my courtroom': Judge Engoron email suggests massive penalty for Trump

Blake also notes that the decision used Trump's lawyers' own words against him.

"The judges noted that despite Trump’s claim to absolute immunity, his own attorney effectively conceded that presidents aren’t absolutely immune," Blake writes.

Blake also argues the decision will likely have a major effect on Trump's second term if he's elected president.

"Trump has signaled an intent to pursue a more authoritarian vision in that term," says Blake, "and for now the justice system is signaling that he won’t be able to pursue it unfettered."