In the aptly named case of Trump v the United States, America's Supreme Court by a majority this week decided that presidents and former presidents are immune from criminal prosecution in certain circumstances, which in plain terms means immunity for a lot of their official acts. While it was expected that some presidential immunity would be confirmed,

the sweeping breadth of this decision was a bombshell at the end of the Supreme Court

term and has profound implications for the criminal cases that Donald Trump is

currently facing and for the ages. Allison Gill is the co-host of Jack a special counsel

podcast which has been following all the machinations of special counsel

Jack Smith's prosecutions and I have no doubt that there is an all-time bumper

episode of the Jack podcast which is about to drop soon,

but I'm very pleased to say that Allison Gill joins us now on Sunday extra.

Welcome back, Allison.

Thank you so much, Julian.

It's good to be here. Well, I suppose saying Trump versus the United States doesn't really narrow it down these days,

but could you remind us which case against Donald Trump it was that came to the Supreme Court

and how it got there?

Yeah, these are the four charges brought by. came to the Supreme Court and how it got there.

Yeah, these are the four charges brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith against Donald

Trump for his role in preventing the peaceful transfer of power and trying to overturn the results of the

2020 election, which he lost. The four charges included defrauding the United

States, a conspiracy against our right to vote and have our vote counted and of course obstructing an official

proceeding and conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding. That is the case

we're talking about. Donald Trump filed saying he was absolutely immune

from any oversight or a criminal prosecution in that case.

And because immunity is considered what they call an interlocutory appeal, which means it must be decided before the case goes to trial.

...