The Supreme Court’s conservative majority appeared ready on Thursday to rule that former presidents have some degree of immunity from criminal prosecution, a move that could further delay the criminal case against former President Donald J. Trump on charges that he plotted to subvert the 2020 election.
Such a ruling would most likely send the case back to the trial court, ordering it to draw distinctions between official and private conduct. It would amount to a major statement on the scope of presidential power.
Though there was seeming consensus among the justices that the case could eventually go forward based on Mr. Trump’s private actions, the additional proceedings could make it hard to conduct the trial before the 2024 election.
There were only glancing references to the timing of the trial and no particular sense of urgency among the more conservative justices at Thursday’s argument. Instead, several of them criticized what they suggested was a political prosecution brought under laws they said were ill suited to the case at hand.
If the court effectively blocks a prompt trial, particularly after it acted quickly in March to restore Mr. Trump to the ballot in Colorado, it will surely ignite furious criticism from liberals and others who view the former president’s actions as an assault on democracy and the rule of law.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who understands himself to be the custodian of the court’s prestige and legitimacy, did not tip his hand very much, though he seemed deeply skeptical of the decision from a unanimous three-judge panel of an appeals court in Washington rejecting Mr. Trump’s immunity claim.
