Explore

The former president is asking the Supreme Court to put the presidency above criminal law as he pursues a broader agenda of expanding the office’s power should he win the election.

If delay prevents this Trump case from being tried this year, our system may never hold the man most responsible for Jan. 6 to account.

Donald J. Trump was turned down when he asked an appeals court — again — to stave off his prosecution on charges that he faked business records to cover up a sex scandal.

If there seems to be a different set of rules for the former president, that’s because, for all intents and purposes, there is.

The justices’ efforts to remain unified in cases affecting the election are fraying as the former president wins one case and is granted a delay in another.

As the Supreme Court tries to recapture its authority and legitimacy, it may be tempted to issue a pair of lopsided decisions both for and against the former president.

The ruling answered a question that an appeals court had never addressed: Can former presidents escape being held accountable by the criminal justice system for things they did while in office?

In a social media post, Donald J. Trump appeared to take a stance that went even further than his lawyers have in court about the scope of immunity from prosecution that a president should enjoy.

A lawyer for the former president said he would be immune from prosecution for the murder of a political rival while in office unless he was first impeached and convicted in Congress.

A three-judge panel appeared unlikely to grant the former president’s request that it throw out federal criminal charges that he plotted to overturn the 2020 election.

The filing by the special counsel, Jack Smith, was the latest move in an ongoing battle over whether former presidents can be criminally liable for things they did while in office.