Former President Donald Trump was convicted last week in his New York criminal trial and his attorneys have already vowed to pursue the appellate process to the highest possible levels, up to and including the U.S. Supreme Court.

On Sunday, Trump himself echoed the calls emanating from some of his legal-minded allies by appearing to call for swift intervention by the Supreme Court to transform his New York loss into a victory, according to Axios.

Meanwhile, the nation's highest court is already on the verge of releasing its ruling on Trump's claimed presidential immunity from prosecution, and that decision will likely have a substantial impact on Trump's other three pending criminal cases regardless of how it is decided.

Trump and others urge Supreme Court to intervene in New York criminal case

On Sunday, former President Trump posted on Truth Social about his New York guilty verdict, "The 'Sentencing' for not having done anything wrong will be, conveniently for the Fascists, 4 days before the Republican National Convention."

"A Radical Left Soros backed D.A., who ran on a platform of 'I will get Trump,' reporting to an 'Acting' Local Judge, appointed by the Democrats, who is HIGHLY CONFLICTED, will make a decision which will determine the future of our Nation?" he added about the prosecutor and judge and his pending presidential nomination at the RNC. "The United States Supreme Court MUST DECIDE!"

Axios observed that Trump's defense team has already revealed their intentions to appeal the guilty verdict through the normal appellate procedure, though that would involve waiting until after sentencing to raise appeals within the New York judicial system before possibly pursuing an appeal in the federal court system if some sort of constitutional or federal violation is identified.

Thus, there have been growing calls from some of his supporters, including House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), among many others, to try and bypass the typical time-consuming appellate process and leapfrog directly to the Supreme Court with an emergency request for swift intervention.

Shocker: Media attacks and mocks Trump's call for Supreme Court intervention

Rather predictably, former President Trump's invocation of immediate Supreme Court intervention has been criticized and mocked by the liberal media and his partisan opponents, such as during an MSNBC panel discussion full of Trump haters disparaging the former president and his supporters as growing increasingly "desperate" in their efforts at "coping" with the reality of the conviction.

Vanity Fair reported that Trump was "Looking for a Little Help From His Friends" on the Supreme Court to overturn his New York conviction, with the clear implication being that he and his supporters fully expected the request to not only be taken up but also to receive a "sympathetic ruling" from the high court's right-leaning majority, half of whom were appointed by Trump himself.

Of course, the liberal outlet merely exploited that as an opportunity to reiterate the left's weak ethical smears and assorted other politically motivated personal attacks against all six members of the majority, including Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett.

Supreme Court's impending immunity ruling could be a huge win for Trump

According to Yahoo! News, even if the Supreme Court declines to intervene in the New York criminal case, a majority of the justices could nonetheless soon hand former President Trump a massive victory that will apply to his three other remaining criminal prosecutions.

The court heard oral arguments in April on Trump's claimed immunity from prosecution, and by nearly all accounts the majority of jurists seemed to indicate that they were inclined to side with the former president, at least to an extent.

To be sure, a rather unlikely ruling in favor of blanket immunity for former presidents would serve to almost instantaneously end the D.C. and Georgia 2020 election-related cases as well as the classified documents case in Florida.

A more likely ruling would be partial immunity for "official acts," but even that would be a win for Trump as it would necessitate the lower courts to individually review each of Trump's alleged crimes as charged to determine if they were covered or not -- each of which could then be further appealed -- all of which would further delay the already paused cases until after the November election ... at which point they could be ended one way or another by Trump's Justice Department if he succeeds in winning a second term in office.