Correct. They gave Trump's team until 12/20 to submit his brief in response to Smith's motion. At that point, Smith will probably have a few days to respond to THAT, and only then does the USSC start any clock on its own deliberations which, as you imply, include whether to actually take the case directly or push it back to the appellate tier.

I view the 12/20 date as the USSC attempting to keep things looking as routine as possible to avoid complaints from either side while avoiding tipping their hand.

In my view, this is ridiculous. No facts need to be presented for the USSC to explicitly clarify no citizen is granted immunity from prosecution of any crime by virtue of at one point being President, even if the crimes were committed while President. The issue involved here is critical enough to the country that the USSC should take this appeal directly and rule on it in DAYS and clearly stating there is no such thing as Presidential immunity.

The very act of considering this question in the context of specific acts undermines the core principle in ways that will be toxic to a system that is supposed to provide equal treatment and protection under the law.


WTH