Trump presents a request to the Court to maintain the suspension of the case until January 6

The former president's lawyers noted that the situation presents "a novel, complex and momentous issue, which deserves careful examination on appeal."

Donald Trump asked the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) to intervene and stop the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit , which ruled that he does not have presidential immunity in the case of electoral interference. Therefore, unless the country's highest court formally intervenes, the case regarding the former president's participation in the events that took place on January 6, 2021 at the Capitol will resume.

According to the ruling of the aforementioned court, which was known in early February, "former President Trump has become citizen Trump, with all of the defenses of any other criminal defendant. But any executive immunity that may have protected him while he served as president no longer protects him against this prosecution. ."

In the presentation made before SCOTUS , the Republican's lawyers indicated that "President Trump’s claim that presidents have absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for their official acts presents a novel, complex and momentous question that warrants careful consideration on appeal." .

The request seeks for the country's highest court to effectively suspend the lower court's ruling and this would require the approval of at least five magistrates. According to the former president's lawyers, they need the suspension to be resumed so they can seek additional review of the appeals court ruling.

Assuming that the Supreme Court grants Trump's request, the case would remain suspended and its resolution could be extended until after the 2024 elections , in which the magnate turns out to be the favorite according to polls. As The New York Times reported, "Unless the justices move quickly, the trial could be pushed into the heart of the 2024 campaign, or even past the election.

In turn, the filing notes that the appeals court's decision represented "a stunning breach of precedent and historical norms." "Without immunity from criminal prosecution, the Presidency as we know it will cease to exist," wrote attorneys D. John Sauer and John Lauro .

The case in question is led by special prosecutor Jack Smith, who charged Trump with four federal crimes for allegedly conspiring to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. Specifically, the four cases are as follows: Conspiracy to Defraud the United States; Conspiracy to Obstruct Official Proceedings ; Obstruction of an Official Procedure and Conspiracy against the rights of citizens, sent a brief to the Supreme Court in mid-December.