Skip to content

Condition: Post with Page_List

Listen
Search
Please enter at least 3 characters.

Latest Stories

Michael Kelley: 'It is likely Trump still held accountable for Jan. 6'

Getty Images
Getty Images

ST. LOUIS (KMOX) - While much of the focus over the past week has been Trump being forced to appear daily at his hush money trial in New York City, this week also saw another Trump case get heard, by the Supreme Court themselves.

On Thursday, U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments over whether Trump should be immune from criminal prosecution while he was the president, stemming from federal charges over his efforts to reverse his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden.


The high court justices appeared likely to reject his claims of absolute immunity, though it seemed very possible that trial could be delayed beyond November's election.

Michael Kelley of Hancock and Kelley discusses Supreme Court case and while he thinks Trump being in office shouldn't mean he can get away with criminal prosecution, he believes the Supreme Court is walking a tight line with this case.

"The reality is Presidents do order people's death around the world and that has to be protected and that's what I think the Supreme Court will navigate," said Kelley. "Based on what I heard, the President will likely be held accountable for Jan. 6, but because of the process, it will be delayed and trial won't happen until after the election."

Jean Evans, former Executive Director of the Republican Party, whose filling in for John Hancock Friday, agrees with Kelley's assessment that there are some things the President needs to be immune from, but they can't get away with everything

"You don't want to be in a position where you're constantly having folks go after a former president cause they disagree with him," said Evans. "However they can't get away with everything and get above the law and do whatever."

Evans thought a lot of questions asked by Supreme Court Thursday on long term implications of the decision they made when it comes to the case was notable to her.

"They're not just looking at this case in a vacuum, they are looking at the impact of their decision and how they will impact going forward," said Evans. "Whatever they decide it's going to be monumental whatever they decide. Even if it doesn't seem to be a big deal, it is going to be a big deal because their hasn't been a ruling on this in our lifetimes."