Trump's trial for election interference headed by special prosecutor Jack Smith delayed indefinitely

The trial of former President Donald Trump for electoral interference in the 2020 election, headed by special prosecutor Jack Smith regarding the events of Jan. 6, 2021, was delayed indefinitely as the court waits for an appeal to be resolved on whether or not the Republican leader has presidential immunity for the crimes charged.

In a brief order, Washington, D.C., District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan formally vacated the March 4 trial date, one day before the Super Tuesday primary, saying the court “set a new schedule if and when the mandate is returned.”

The judge referred to the request for a mistrial by Trump's defense, which argues that the former president is immune from the charges brought by prosecutor Smith.

So far, a federal appeals court is considering Trump's claim of presidential immunity for his actions while still in office. However, a formal ruling on the matter has not yet been issued and it is expected that, once the lower court rules, the Supreme Court could eventually review the case. However, time is ticking, which puts the case in jeopardy, as the original trial was scheduled for March.

Smith accused former President Trump of conspiracy to defraud the United States; conspiracy against rights; conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding; and obstruction and attempted obstruction of an official proceeding. It all arose from the special counsel's investigation into whether Trump was involved in the events of Jan. 6, 2021, or other alleged interference in the outcome of the 2020 election.

Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges last year, and his legal team filed a motion urging Judge Chutkan to halt proceedings against the former president in the Jan. 6 case while his appeal is pending. The judge said she still does not have jurisdiction over the matter until the Supreme Court rules.

Judge Chutkan's recent delay of the trial comes after prosecutor Smith attempted to bypass the appeals court review and asked the Supreme Court in December to consider the case immediately, seeking to buy valuable time in the midst of a intense electoral campaign.

However, the Supreme Court did not accept Smith's sudden request and let the case be reviewed in the first instance by a three-court panel of the D.C. Circuit.