Why Hasn't the Supreme Court Ruled on Trump's Presidential Immunity Argument?

Over 100 days have passed since the Supreme Court agreed to rule on whether former President Donald Trump is immune to criminal prosecution for actions done while in office. What’s causing the delay, and where does the case stand?

Impact of Delay: An article in the Daily Beast (Left bias) quoted multiple lawyers concluding that the court delay, intentional or unintentional, was benefiting Trump. Laurence Tribe, a constitutional law professor at Harvard University, stated, “They’re obviously delaying to benefit Donald Trump.” Former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich stated, “the Supreme Court’s far-right justices are effectively giving Trump the immunity he’s seeking” by delaying a ruling. 

How Will They Rule? An article in the Washington Examiner (Lean Right bias) laid out the stakes of the case and listed potential hints toward how the justices will rule. Trump’s immunity argument was rejected by two lower courts, but two conservative justices both expressed a disagreement with how those courts ruled, raising the potential that the Supreme Court will send the case back down for additional argument, further delaying Trump’s criminal trials.

How Should They Rule? The Hill (Center bias) quoted former Attorney General Eric Holder stating that a ruling in favor of presidential criminal immunity would be “an absurd and dangerous conclusion.” Trump recently argued on Truth Social that “Without Presidential Immunity, a President will not be able to properly function, or make decisions, in the best interest of the United States of America.”