Special counsel Jack Smith has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take up Donald Trump's appeals right away, but that process could still delay his first criminal trial.
The court swiftly agreed to take on the case and skip over the mid-level appellate court in Washington, D.C., but recent history suggests "the present court usually takes longer than six months to move at its version of lightning speed," reported The Daily Beast.
An analysis by law professor Stephen Vladeck and his research assistant David Merlinsky at the University of Texas at Austin found the court has weighed in 50 times in the past century on important and time-sensitive cases before an appellate court reviews the matter.
Some matters actually moved quickly, such as the current court's decisions to strike down President Joe Biden's student-loan forgiveness and leave a six-week abortion ban in effect in Texas, which took just 84 days.
However, the last four such cases took 246 days on average, although the most recent case -- which left Louisiana's gerrymandered map in effect -- took only 11 days.
Trump argues that all of his actions to remain in power despite his election loss were undertaken as part of his official duties as president, and if a Supreme Court which was largely shaped by Trump himself agrees, that could wipe out Smith's case in D.C. and Fulton County district attorney Fani Willis' case in Georgia.
"If the Supreme Court grants him these powers, then his attempted coup bears the weight of the presidential seal," reported Jose Pagliery for The Beast.
"Similarly, the Supreme Court could also suck the life out of both coup criminal cases if it sides with Trump’s alternative legal argument — that the 'double jeopardy' clause in the Fifth Amendment, which protects people from being prosecuted twice for the same crime, somehow applies because the House of Representatives already impeached him over this in 2021."
It took the court exactly two months in 1974 to consider a petition on Richard Nixon and Watergate, hear arguments, and reach a conclusion that his tape recordings could be subpoenaed without violating his executive authority, and Smith cited that case in asking the justices to hear this appeal – and the special counsel envisions a similar timeline.
"In the second filing, Smith proposed a rapid-fire schedule to the Supreme Court, one that would argue the case on paper over three weeks or so," Pagliery reported. "If he gets his way, this would be over by the beginning of February — just in time to have potential jurors fill out questionnaires."
