According to CBS News, one of former President Donald Trump's attorneys told the Supreme Court that his client cannot be prosecuted for actions he took following the 2020 election.

Yet some observers say that regardless of how the justices ultimately rule, America's highest judicial body has already crushed any chance for a conviction.

Defense attorney: Future presidents "will face de facto blackmail"

Lawyer D. John Sauer submitted a filing on Tuesday in which he argued that the case "will affect the presidency itself for the rest of our nation's history."

"This court should not adopt a rule that creates the appearance of a President Trump-only gerrymander. That would be the antithesis of the rule of law," Sauer insisted.

"Once our nation crosses this Rubicon, every future president will face de facto blackmail and extortion while in office, and will be harassed by politically motivated prosecution after leaving office, over his most sensitive and controversial decisions," he continued.

"That bleak scenario would result in a weak and hollow President, and would thus be ruinous for the American political system as a whole," the lawyer went on to add.

CNN legal expert calls move "a gift to Trump"

CBS News noted that it was originally Smith who asked the Supreme Court late last year to determine whether Trump enjoys immunity.

However, Smith later reversed course and requested that justices not hear the case after they declined to fast-track the matter.

As CNN legal expert Jeffrey Toobin explained in a February social media post, the Supreme Court is unlikely to announce its ruling until late June.

#SCOTUS ruling is a gift to Trump, even if the Justices ultimately rule against him on immunity. A decision in late June makes a DC trial on 1/6 issues nearly impossible. 3/25 NYC trial in the Stormy case will be the only Trump criminal trial before Election Day.

— Jeffrey Toobin (@JeffreyToobin) February 28, 2024

Toobin characterized this move as being "a gift to Trump" as it means that his criminal trial is all but certain not to wrap up before voters go to the polls in November.

Law professor says Smith is violating DOJ policy

Smith's attempt to expedite Trump's case has received condemnation including from those who are not planning to vote for the former president.

They include Harvard Law School professor Jack Goldsmith, who wrote that it "appears to violate" the Department of Justice's Justice Manual. It reads,

Federal prosecutors and agents may never select the timing of any action, including investigative steps, criminal charges, or statements, for the purpose of affecting any election, or for the purpose of giving an advantage or disadvantage to any candidate or political party.

"If this were any other defendant than Donald Trump, the rush to trial—which cannot possibly give the Trump legal team adequate time to prepare its defense—would be deemed wildly unfair," Goldsmith asserted.