Two outcomes: 1. Courts deny the immunity assertion, and we get some caselaw that's bad for future Trumpies. 2. Courts approve it, which they would have for the Trumpies anyway, so why not take advantage? In either case, there'd be considerable delay.
But…we’re beyond caselaw mattering. D president - not immune, not constitutional, bad. R president - immune, constitutional, good.
He won't do it, but their case would be strongest if Obama would intervene. He can just say he strongly disagrees with the Supreme Court's immunity ruling, but he has the right to assert non-frivolous defenses on his own behalf and on behalf of his subordinates, so bam:
The main problem is that the rulings would likely be sealed bc of grand jury secrecy rules, but (a) there would be leaks and (b) there would be good arguments that the rulings should be partially unsealed so the public can see the legal discussion. There is plenty of precedent for this.
Read through a GM court hearing document that was “Kate’s” testimony regarding how she knew GM & JE that someone posted late last night… all 267 or 269 pages of it. Trump was named as “a good friend of JE” and Mar-a-largo was named as place in this court document.
The best way to undermine the immunity decision is to use it to remove all conservatives SCOTUS justices if we ever get a chance. Basically, do what Biden should have given the judicial coup that decision (and the 14th sec 3 case) were.