The Supreme Court heard oral arguments this week about one of the historic and

consequential cases against former President Donald Trump. The case hinges on

whether Trump has presidential immunity

protecting him from key charges brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith. In this

episode we speak with a legal expert about what we learned from the court's

questioning of both legal sides, what

to expect in the coming months, and the implications of the case for Trump and future

presidents.

I'm Daily Wire, editor-in-Chief John Bickley.

It's Sunday April 28th, and this is an extra edition of Morning Wire.

Joining us now to discuss Trump's presidential immunity case at the Supreme Court this week is

Loyola Law Professor and legal commentator Jessica Levinson.

Jessica, thanks for coming on.

Thanks for having me back. So first we had multiple hours of questions and answers for this case in the High Court.

What are your takeaways from what you heard in oral arguments Thursday?

My big takeaway is that the Supreme Court is not going to say

that there is absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for former

presidents and they're not going to say that there's no immunity. So we're going to see here that the Supreme Court is going to find some

middle ground where if you are a former president and you face criminal

charges there's going to be some bucket of actions where you can't

face those charges because you're immune and then there'll be this other bucket of actions

where you can because all things being equal under the Constitution we understand that the

...