The Daily Fuckup

On June 29, 2024, Donald Trump’s federal election-interference case was still waiting on a Supreme Court decision about whether former presidents can claim immunity for conduct tied to official acts in office. The justices had already heard argument in the case on April 25, but they had not yet issued a ruling. That left the prosecution in place and the litigation unresolved, with the answer to the immunity question still hanging over the case.

The appeal matters because it goes to the basic shape of the case. Trump’s lawyers have argued that some of the conduct described by prosecutors should be treated as protected presidential activity. Prosecutors have said the case concerns actions that fall outside any ordinary immunity shield. Until the Supreme Court answered the question, neither side had the final word on what parts of the alleged conduct could be used in the criminal case.

The timing also kept the issue politically visible. The January 6 case was not disappearing into the background while Trump campaigned; it remained one of the biggest open legal fights attached to his effort to overturn the 2020 election. Every step in the Supreme Court process kept that record in view, and every delay in a ruling extended the period in which the case could shape public debate around Trump’s conduct and his argument for protection from prosecution.

The broader stakes were not limited to one defendant. A ruling for Trump would have narrowed the reach of criminal liability for a former president. A ruling against him would have left the prosecution on track and clarified that the claimed immunity did not block the case altogether. As of June 29, the Court had not chosen either path. The case was still alive, and the outcome was still unknown.