donald trump says that immigrants like tanya chutkan are poisoning the blood of america, a phrase that donald trump has lifted directly from adolf hitler. but the proof that judge chutkan bears no judicial prejudice against donald trump whatsoever came today, in the form of a court of appeals opinion in an order that affirmed every single word judge tanya chutkan wrote in her 48-page opinion, in december, -- donald trump's claim of immunity for any crimes he committed while president. judge chutkan's opinion said that the presidency, quote, does not confer a lifelong get out of jail free pass. there were many winners today, when the court of appeals opinion was issued. special prosecutor jack smith and his brilliant legal team, the framers of the constitution with alexander hamilton being specifically quoted in the opinion, supporting criminal prosecutions in -- . the american people who believe in the rule of law were very big winners today, and the people who believe in donald trump or once again, like donald trump himself, big losers today. but, the individual biggest winner of the

so tanya chutkan hands the mandate back, which means she's got the football in her hands, right.ossession of the case in its control. maybe there is a certain process happening, on -- across the street from the u. s. capital. but for the -- purposes, that doesn't matter. the big question is if he gets a stay, then what? >> 100%. so first case i ever worked on as a clerk up, there there are four votes to grant, but it was a death penalty case, they couldn't get the fit for a stay , and he was executed. so the rule of five versus the rule of four matters here. >> that's a good point. >> but i think given this case and the topic, i don't think only four will vote. let's say five votes -- for the first thing that will happen is it will be presented to chief justice roberts, who is the circuit judge for the d. c. circuit. he will refer to the court, and they will decide whether to grant. they might in this case, it is unusual, treat trump's motion for a state as a petition for -- , especially since jack smith is already moved for it. so they could even move more quickly. one thing is

let's go, back on december 1st federal, judge tanya chutkan ruled on trump's focus immunity claim. finding, it borderless. days later on december 11th special prosecutor jack smith anticipating that this claim was no other attempt to delay and will fail on the merits did something audacious. he went straight to the supreme court skipping an intermediate appellate level and said, look let's be clear here. you know, and i know what's going on. hear trump's trying to delay this is likely in europe. if you're in line to take, and let's do it. now let's get to the. marriage to the republic interest in this case coming a trial can be preserved and the court, said no. just before christmas, they said no. now, people said at the time maybe that makes sense because maybe supreme court justices want to let the lower appellate court, the colleagues in the d.c. circuit away. in and not even take up the case because they're so clear cut. and then what happened? the appellate court did take that. case they had oral arguments, they had, briefs they took a while. the clock was ticking the whole ti

tanya chutkan, sort of against her will, had to sort of say hands off this case. she put a stay on everything. the trump team even refused to accept discovery in this case. they said we don't even want to move forward with anything. the date was taken off the books. she, of any of these judges in any of the criminal cases with trump, was the one that really wanted to get this in. sort of before the deadline. so we'll see if she can get this back on track. it looks likely. >> elie honig, again, we have to wait and see or hear from the supreme court or hear nothing from the supreme court. >> if they deny it, they'll say it. >> if they do deny it then, how quickly can this get before the district court? >> a great question. so remember, this case had been set for trial for many months for march 4th. that was the date we all had circled on our calendars. last week, judge chutkan recognizing the reality, we have been sidetracked for two month with this, from the time the appeal was filed until now, said it can't happen march 4th. the question is how quickly can she get

and so, federal judge tanya chutkan in the d.c. district court, she is saying march 4th, it is off the counselor, vacated, postponed, that's where we are now. it is not going to be the first case against trump going forward when he faces criminal charges, and judge tanya chutkan says the court will set a new schedule if and when the case returns back to her court, once the appeals are over. brianna? >> all right, that is a big development that it is going to be postponed there. katelyn paul lance with the believers there, we will be right back. (vo) with fargo, the new virtual assistant from wells fargo, when dad brings up the importance of... (dad) building credit. (vo) ... you're ready. (daughter cutting him off) dad. fargo, what's my fico score? (dad) wow. it's a work of art. (vo) do you fargo? you can, with wells fargo. what else can fargo do? instantly tell you what you spend on things like food. (dad) fargo, what did i spend on groceries this month? (son) hey dad, can the guys stay for dinner? (dad) no. (vo) want faster, easi

on sunday -- friday, judge tanya chutkan ordered an order delaying the former presidents case, callinghe march 4th trial date. the case has been on pause for weeks as the d.c. circuit court weighs whether the former president is immune from prosecution. and now, the decision from the three judge panel could come at any moment. back in january, the judge expressed deep skepticism over trump's argument blanket immunity. this isn't the only major decision that type trump's anxiously awaiting in the coming days. right now, the ex president is staying -- staring down a devastating verdict in his new york civil business fraud trial. judge arthur and go and already ruled trump engaged in fraud. his final decision now concerns how much money the former president and his codefendants oh, as well as whether trump can still do business in new york state. the new york attorney general, letitia james, is seeking a whopping $370 million from trump and the other defendants. that means a decision in the state's favorite could not only deal a blow to trump's businessman persona, but also potentially le

judge tanya chutkan and her decision said there's no criminal immunity, full stop. the d.c.ivil cases that's more complicated. you have immunity within the outer or up to the outer perimeter of a president's duties, and beyond that there is no immunity, and at the oral argument, judge karen henderson, a george h.w. bush nominee to that circuit and the most senior judge seemed to be flirting with the idea that we should import that rule from the civil context and make the criminal one just the same. that could be a disaster here. >> hold on, let's walk through this and get very specific. that means that donald trump would be immune for anything related to his official acts as president, as the civil statute says, and i guess the question, then, would be, does what he did on january 6th and leading up to january 6th saying the election was stolen, even though courts kept telling him there wasn't, there was no evidence, his team never produced evidence of fraud, and he was just saying it, does that fall within the bounds of his official duties? >> well, let's even go back a ste

right. >> the way the calendar had set up that the judge, john chinese, tanya chutkan had set up the calendar. jake was to give the teams the two sides about seven to eight weeks of pretrial preparation and so we would assume that whenever this this this comes down and if donald trump loses, right, that calendar restarts and that's, we're talking about another seven or eight weeks, so yeah. >> so just so i mean, obviously, if the supreme court says donald trump has immunity, then it's amancio. that's the end of that case. but if they say no, he doesn't. that's end of june theoretically, that means end of july and august and have august the trial could start, but then there is this rule in i don't know if it's an official role or a tradition, but that the us justice department is not supposed to be doing prosecutions that close to an election, although i think it's what is it like 100 days or something, right? >> it's jenna generally the the count the the clock starts running somewhere. people interpreted in different ways, jake labor day as she had labor day ish again, the you know,

it was rejected promptly by judge tanya chutkan who says presidents don't have get out of jail free cardss month by a washington, d.c. appeals court. though it was rejected, the argument has succeeded in delaying this trial. the arguments the supreme court st for the week of april 22nd, that's the week we project jury deliberations in a trump d.c. trial. norah, no comment from special counsel jack smith tonight. >> all right, scott macfarlane, thank you. i want to bring in cbs news chief legal correspondent jan crawford and cbs news chief election campaign correspondent robert costa. all right, jan, what's behind the court's decision to take this case? >> i think they had to take this case. even under supreme court rules, when you've got an issue this tremendously significant under the constitution that's never been decided, which this case is, that's the kind of case you want the supreme court to have the final say. and they've set a timeline that means they could have a decision by the end of june, which is what jack smith had asked for. this is all part of them trying to decide this an

judge tanya chutkan saying she won't set a new date until an appeals court weighs in on trump's claim of presidential immunity. jury selection was set to begin next week. >>> next tonight here, to michigan, where closing arguments have ended in the trial against jennifer crumbley. her fate soon in the hands of the jury. trevor ault in michigan again tonight. >> reporter: tonight, the fate of the first parent on trial for their child's deadly school shooting will soon be in the hands of a jury. jennifer crumbley, charged with those four unprecedented counts of involuntary manslaughter, the prosecution claiming she was too wrapped up in her own hobbies and extramarital affairs to pay attention to her son's cries for help. >> she has done the unthinkable, and because of that, four kids have died. >> reporter: in their closing argument, prosecutors telling the jury, this case is about what crumbley knew and did not do. >> she walked out of that school when just the smallest, smallest of things could have saved, could have helped hanna and tate and madison and justin. >> the first thing i

trial dates do move, and this case with judge tanya chutkan, there is much anticipation of when the appealsrt will determine what the law is here, when it will go back to judge chutkan, and when that 2020 election case could be put back on the calendar, and especially whether it will happen before the presidential election of 2024. something the justice department very much wants to happen no matter when the manhattan d.a.'s case and other cases against trump go forward. so we will wait and see that. trump, of course, doesn't want this trial to happen before the presidential election in november. it would shine quite a light on the end of his presidency, how he managed his white house. there would be formal officials called to testify against him, very possibly his own former vice president, mike pence, and it would put a spotlight on how donald trump viewed elections in a critical moment where he's still running for the american presidency. katelyn polantz, cnn, washington. >>> now to the latest in the georgia 2020 election subversion case against trump and more than a dozen of his allies.

on friday judge tanya chutkan indefinitely delayed the trial date of jack smith's federal january 6th-related prosecution until the appeals about trump's immunity are decided. the federal mar-a-lago case theoretically set for may 20, but consensus is that date will not hold. meanwhile, alvin bragg's prosecution of trump for covering up the sex scandal is still on the calendar for march 25. then there's the question of d.a. fani willis's election interference case in georgia which willis asked to start on august 5th, and that was before the defendants demanded she step down from the case. on friday willis filed a 176-page response to the challenge. willis's critics allege she is in a romantic relationship with the lead special prosecutor she appointed, nathan wade, who they say was under qualified and billed the state for more than $650,000 in fees since 2021 and wade took willis on vacations using the money he was paid. the other two special prosecutors hired by willis were paid approximately $73,000 and $91,000. they were not in the lead position and as such would not work as many billable h

with the supreme court, after which the clock would start running again on his trial before judge tanya chutkan. jennings is harvard law school professor laurence tribe, constitutional scholars supreme court litigator and author most recently of two and a presidency, the power of impeachment. so professor tribe, can you put it into further perspective, the importance, the magnitude of this ruling? >> anderson, i think today's ruling was historic, to put it mildly. it's the first time an appellate court has had occasion to consider the rather extravagant claim that being president puts you above the law, enables you to commit crimes, at least when they are within the outer perimeter of your office but actually, in trump's case, he was making even more remarkable claim that he could commit crimes regardless of whether he was doing it in his official capacity. all of those arguments that he made, to put himself above the law, were dismembered, piece by piece, methodically, in this historic opinion, which, as you've indicated, is likely to be studied by law students for generations, especially beca

because if the supreme court denies the state in the absolute immunity issue and returns the case to tanya chutkan in d. c., the election interference case, i would love to see her take that case and drop it on the docket for may 20th if judge cannon kicks the may 20th date down in florida. >> mm, okay, interesting theory then glenn. okay to trump's tried and true tactic is delay, delay, delay. but how much longer can that really continue throughout all the cases? is there a line here that he's bumping up against? >> yeah, you know, the time on the calendar is growing short. i think it's about 8. 5 months until the november 2024 presidential election. he can continue the case is only as long as courts, as judges allow him to continue the cases. really the big open question right now is what will the supreme court do with the state and with the absolute immunity issue? i don't think there's any basis for them to either grant the state or to take the absolute immunity issue up on appeal. but if they do, boy, they will be doing donald trump an enormous favor. because that will inevitably delay his d.

have to take into account is that the prep time that the judge who is overseeing this case, judge tanya chutkan, the prep time she allottedti for trump and his lawyers has been effectively stalled. judge chutkan initially gave donald trump and his legal team seven months to preparein for ts case,o from the day he was indicted to t the original tria date in march. back in december, on december 7thde trump's legal team asked r a pause, a stay in this case while trump's immunity claims were appealed. and judge chutkan granted it. and thatan pause didn't just freeze the case, it also paused all the prep time as well. trump's team still had 88 days left to prepare before the case was paused and the expectation now isn't that they would still get those 88 days or something similar to prep when this case is unpaused. so that's point number 1. even ifmb the supreme court rul this case can go forward the day after they hear oral arguments, the trial just can't start right away. trump's team would get another 88 g days. now, point number 2 is about how long the trial would actually take. last year before

tanya chutkan just formally canceled trump's election interference trial. that you schedule if and when the mandate is returned. the mandate, of course, is that long awaited decision by the appellate court on the ex presidents claim of absolute immunity for prosecution. until that ruling, which we are still waiting for, we don't know -- arguably the most important trial in race in american history, and certainly those four criminal cases against trump will happen. just the kind of delay he wants. joining me now, harry litman for more deputy assistant attorney general at the department of justice. let's just start with this. i think just acknowledging what anyone knew to be true, it is essentially an administrative move that put hot the fact is not been three or four weeks, i think, and we still don't have anything from the d.c. circuit. >> 24 days. and, yes, it's administrative. the mandate is what one aide for jurisdiction. and that sense, it is not my case anymore, but if and when -- wafts off the page, the sigh of frustration with it, d.c. circuit, is th

tanya chutkan ruled against him, and then the d.c. circuit upheld chutkan's decision. what are the chances of the supreme court granting this temporary stay? >> i think it's unlikely the court is going to grant the stay. i think it's also highly likely the court may allow the d.c. circuit's decision to stand. i want to make clear it's not a question what the court does but when the court will do it. of the longer the court takes on this session means donald trump has won. we've already blown past that march 4th deadline to begin the trial in d.c. and the further out we get from an actual trial date, the more likely it is that donald trump will not go on trial at all. so the supreme court really has a role to play here, and its role is making a decision and doing so with some measure of expedition. >> if trump is granted this temporary stay by the supreme court, when should we expect to see this trial getting under way? >> well, if the stay is granted, then i think all bets are off. but, again, we also have the disqualification hearing that was a couple -- i guess last

decide to affirm the earlier ruling, as they should, and hand the case back to district court judge tanya chutkane would need a few months to get the case back on track and a trial. that would take us past july when donald trump is expected to become the party's nominee. and at that point, what will the doj and attorney general merrick garland decide to do. will they move forward with the trial that would have to get under way during the heat of the general election? or would they allow trump to yet again evade accountability before the presidential election? joining me now is a power house legal panel andrew weissmann, former fbi general counsel and former senior member of the mueller probe. melissa murray, law professor at new york university and msnbc legal analyst. maya wily, former u.s. assistant attorney and president and ceo of the leadership conference on civil and human rights and paul butler, former federal prosecutor, and msnbc legal analyst. a power house panel indeed. i'm going to go to those who are at a disadvantage because they're not here at the table with me, andrew. i'm going t

the judge in that case, judge tanya chutkan, stayed the case. she effectively put it on hold while trump's claim of a presidential immunity makes its wayke through the appeals proce. trump has made clear if he loses at the appellate level, he plans to appeal again to the supreme court. and judgel chutkan has made clr if donald trump does, in fact, appeal to the highest court in thehi land, she will keep this case frozen, unable to proceed until there is a decision from the supreme court. but it's been 50 days. and we don't even have an appeals court ruling yet.t and as politico reports, again, today, the longer it takes for the appeals court to rule, the likelier the supreme court would punt the issue into the fall, effectively ruling out a trial before they election. can anything be done here? joining me now are michael schmidt, "the new york times" investigative reporter and our not so secret weapon nbc political analyst lisa ruben. every night we say is this the night, is this the night that the appeals court will reach a decision in this imm

back in august, it was assigned to district judge tanya chutkan, who said that she intended to swiftly move it to trial. of course, trump started them playing every possible delay tactic, eventually bringing his dubious immunity claim to the appeals court. now at that, point this was in mid december, just about two months ago, judge chutkan put the case on hold. she paused it. so, now two months later, we finally have their decision. but, the court is giving trump in till next monday, february 12th, to appeal to the supreme court. now keep in mind, this trial was originally set to begin on march 4th, which is less than a month from now. that is no longer gonna happen. in fact, judge chutkan formally postponed it last week. even if the supreme court decides not to take up trump's case, and makes that decision quickly, which is a possibility, the trial would most likely not start in till may at the earliest. that's because judge chutkan, i think quite rightly, has said she would give trump's team back all that trial preparation time they lost while the case was on pause. so the far eddie

if the high court, however, rejects trump's application the case will go back to judge tanya chutkanl resume preparing for trial, a process that's been on hold since december. and this case likely would conclude just barely before november. >>> still ahead we'll turn to sports. we'll bring you highlights from another big upset in college basketball with an unranked team taking down one of the sport's top programs. >>> plus the head coach of the san francisco 49ers is trying to explain his baffling over time strategy after sunday's loss to the chiefs in the big game. that's all straight ahead. me that's all straight ahead. ♪everything i do that's for my health is an accomplishment.♪ ♪concerns of getting screened faded away♪ ♪to my astonishment.♪ ♪my doc gave me a script i got it done without a delay.♪ ♪i screened with cologuard and did it my way.♪ cologuard is a one-of-a-kind way to screen for colon cancer that's effective and non-invasive. it's for people 45 plus at average risk, not high risk. false positive and negative results may occur. ask your provider for cologuard. ♪i did it

>>> tonight's last word is the last word that the court of appeals said today about judge tanya chutkan's ruling and against donald trump's claim of immunity. the peels court said that that ruling is affirmed. that's tonight's last word. the 11th hour with stephanie ruhle starts now. stephanie ruhle starts now. >>> tonight, donald trump's sweeping claims of immunity rejected by a federal appeals court. what happens next for the former presidents delay tactics. >>> then, polls closed in nevada's primary. nikki haley ran unopposed with zero delegates on the line. does this contest have any impact on the nomination? >>> and with a failed impeachment vote in a blocked border bill, do republicans have a plan c for immigration? as the 11th hour gets underway on this tuesday night. ♪ ♪ ♪ >>> good evening once again. i'm stephanie ruhle. we are now 273 days away from the election. and this is been an absolutely huge newsday. in nevada, votes are being counted in the states primaries. in washington, speaker mike johnson led an embarrassing supply of setbacks will not one, but two failed votes. and

if the supreme court denies trump's request, the case would go back to washington-based judge tanya chutkan. earlier this month judge chutkan delayed the march 4th trial dale until the question of trump's immunity is decided. >>> still ahead here, house republicans are expected to launch another impeachment effort against homeland security secretary alejandro mayorkas later today. but do they have the votes this time after failing last time? and these right here are live pictures from the senate where we expect to see a vote on a stand alone foreign aid bill this morning, but some republicans as you can see are trying to delay things. we'll bring you much more on that as well as a check on sports and weather when we come right back. orts and weather whe right back can neuriva support your brain health? mary, janet, hey!! (thinking: eddie, no frasier, frank... frank?) fred! how are you?! fred... fuel up to 7 brain health indicators, including your memory. join the neuriva brain health challenge. when you have chronic kidney disease... ...there are places you'd like to be. like here. and here

special counsel jack smith and judge tanya chutkan, who are overseeing the trump federal investigationcretary of state shenna bellows, who disqualified trump from the ballot. and nearly three dozen members of congress since christmas, according to one report, and that includes house majority whip tom emmer, representatives shontel brown and marjorie taylor greene, and senator rick scott. today, house minority leader hakeem jeffries responded to the recent wave of threats. >> members of congress should be able to serve free of violence, harassment, and intimidation on both sides of the aisle. so we can do what the american people sent us to washington to do, which is solve problems and deliver real results. lisa: just this week, the house sergeant at arms sent a letter to members' families about their security, advising them to stay in touch with local law enforcement. to help explain swatting and what can be done to stop it, i'm joined by lauren shapiro, a professor at john jay college of criminal justice and author of cyber-predators and their prey. what is swatting and how fast is it

making is not unlike what we have seen before from federal prosecutors in the case before judge tanya chutkanpeople that has a proclivity of saying things that threaten people in the united states, and may not have access to security. we're talking about potential witnesses, prosecutors aside from the elected district attorney, alvin bragg, and they are also adding a third component that's missing from the order before judge chutkan. they want the gag order to apply to prospective juror as well, saying the president's former conduct has endangered people like this, and given that this is a jury trial, they think that's really important. >> i'm going to try, if i can, charles, to over simpfully this. is this about free speech versus a fair trial sfl. >> -- fair trial. >> well, if you're trump's attorneys you're likely to go to make that argument. donald trump is basically going to say i have a right to be able to exercise my free speech and the fact that i have a social media pampl of literally hundreds of millions of followers is not necessarily my fault and can't be held against me. one of t

the judge in that case, judge tanya chutkan, stayed the case, effectively putting it on hold while trump'sim of presidential immunity makes its way through the appeals process. trump has made clear that if he loses at the appellate level, he plans to appeal again, to the supreme court. and judge chutkan has made clear that if donald trump does appeal to the highest court in the land, she will keep this case frozen, unable to proceed until there is a decision from the supreme court. but it has been 50 days, and we don't even have an appeals court ruling yet. and as political reports, again today the longer it takes for the appeals court to rule, the likely or the supreme court would punch the issue into the fall, effectively ruling out a trial before the election. can anything be done here? joining me now, michael schmidt, new york times investigative reporter, and our not-so-secret weapon, msnbc legal analyst lisa rubin. thank you both for being. here every night, lisa, we say is this the night? is this the night that the appeals court will reach a decision in this immunity case and grante

and then the case could quickly be returned to the trial schedule, and judge tanya chutkan's courtroom. on the last page of jack smith's brief today, after tongue the supreme court there is no reason for them to take the case, he then suggested a schedule. for the supreme court. if they decide to take this case, jack smith told the court, if they decide to take the case that -- forced to file their appeals brief ten days after the supreme court agrees to take the case, and that jack smith should then be required to file his brief seven days thereafter, and that the trump lawyers could then be allowed to file a reply brief five days thereafter. that allows a total of three weeks for all of the briefs to be written, submitted to the court, after the day the supreme court agrees to take the case. if today is any indication of the speed of jack smith's team, they probably would not use all seven days to write the brief. so it could be a few days friday than three weeks. it can be done. it has been done. when the stakes for this high once before in 1974, when a criminal president was seekin

for the first time, judge tanya chutkan has publicly acknowledged that the federal election interferencet donald trump could extend well into 2024. what is your biggest concern if that happens, besides trump wins and he wipes this whole slate? >> there will of law will not be upheld. i think this is the strongest case that could be tried before the election. the other case, it could be tried, it's in new york. the case with alvin bragg going after trump with the stormy daniels hush money payment. it's not a strong of a case. this one is strong. and we're talking about strong woaboujuto cancel her intvacato do ood news. but thaisin the poland mark mckinnon. xperts from ththey from gojust gmonday night. se signs d lead to worse. parodontax is clinically proven to reverse the signs of early gum disease. parodontax, the gum experts. known as a loving parent. known for lessons that matter. known for lessons that matter. known for being a free spirit. no one wants to be known for cancer, but a treatment can be. keytruda is known to treat cancer, fda-approved for 16 types of cancer. one of thos

because you know, in that case, judge tanya chutkan in the district court had issued a limited gag order d.c. circuit limited a little more than what judge chutkan had done. and you know, alvin bragg thought, hey, i'm going to go in and ask for the same thing. this is already made it up to one court of appeals, not my court of appeals but another highly respected federal court of appeals. i think that was a smart move on his part. it's about not making statements or directing others to make statements about known or foreseeable witnesses that could be about their participation in the case, also directing him not to make statements about attorneys within the d.a.'s office, court staff, their families that would be intended to or directing others to that would be intended to interfere with the case. or making public statements about jurors. that's the thing he added on that was not part of the d.c. circuit. >> which is important because i have been saying for a long time, a lot of what trump's drama is about is trying to influence the potential jury pool that would have to judge him. the o

a lot of pressure would be brought on judge tanya chutkan, who's overseeing this case, to postpone orff. she has so far shown no interest in doing that. but the flip side of that is that many people argue that it is simply unacceptable for voters to go into a presidential election, not knowing the innocence or the guilt of donald trump as to whether he tried to subvert the previous election. geoff: and then add to all of that william, the new york civil fraud trial. what's the latest there? william: last week we were supposed to have heard from trump judge arthur about that case. he then said at the end of the week that he needs a little bit more time to make his ruling. this case as we have reported in the past is about whether or not what penalty donald trump and his associates should be getting for this decade-long fraud that they committed, that the judge has ruled that they did commit. and so this is a penalty phase. the attorney general in new york wants hundreds of millions of dollars from former president and his business associates and wants him banned from doing work in new

remain and it could take up until july 1st what they think and there's not a day left based on what tanya chutkan said and shocking, but not surprising that the american people will have to be their own jurors once again. >> and the supreme court issues a ruling that says no one is above being put on trial while eliminating the very trial then that is a stress test for their credibility. we'll be talking about it more, but i did want to mention that on the handoff. nice to see you. >> thank you very much. i'll go watch. >> absolutely. our thanks to nicole wallace who is leading up the breaking news coverage when this story first broke, the supreme court first made it clear where it was headed yesterday and that was just about 25 hours ago. today we have a breakdown for you as we look at the central question of donald trump's aurt in the january 6th case and does he have a made-up immune they no president has ever had that's never been found in precedent, in law and the constitution and as the supreme court has now said it will, does it require to be -- does that reyear it must be reviewed in dela

let me get your thoughts on the conversation between the judge, and calling judge tanya chutkan, who actual election interference case that is now delayed as trump -- if he'll works its way to the supreme court. what do you make of that decision, given that the trial is so critical for both what happens in new york and what happens in d.c.? >> first of all, let me just say, literally, i've got someone for jury duty here in new york county, for later february. i can move her to a new date, i moved her to mid march 25th. i will be fair when i convict him, i promise. -- >> i don't think you're allowed to tell anyone that you're on that jury. >> i don't think you're going to make it. >> i'm not kidding, i really do. for two weeks from now, but you can move it to a later date. >> you understand that when you become a part of those legal worries, as we just saw, you get death threats, bomb threats, as we saw. >> i sued trump supporters for trying to kill me from -- the maga publication. i think all of us, and listeners to my show as well, but i've liked the d.c. case to go first. that was

now judge tanya chutkan postponed indefinitely the march 4th election interference case writing, quotet will set a new schedule if and when the mandate is returned. never fear, the manhattan d.a. is here. a march 25th trial day right around the corner. joining me now former federal prosecutor host of the justice medic podcast an msnbc legal analyst, glenn kirschner. glenn, my friend, let's put the conspiracy theories to rest, shall we? let's talk about why the fact that the d.c. election interference case is not on the docket anymore is not all doom and gloom. >> it is not. donald trump's criminal trial dance card remains packed. he has at least two trials in the coming months. either which could go, in theory that could both go. we will see donald trump criminally prosecuted in the coming months in one jurisdiction, or another. i think the next court date to pay attention to, katie, is march 1st. just as you indicated the march 4th trial day in d.c. for him trying to overturn the 2020 presidential election has dropped off the calendar. that trial will now have to await resolution of t

for the first time, judge tanya chutkan has publicly acknowledged that the federal election interferencet donald trump could extend well into 2024. what is your biggest concern if that happens, besides trump wins and he wipes this whole slate? >> there will of law will not be upheld. i think this is the strongest case that could be tried before the election. the other case, it could be tried, it's in new york. the case with alvin bragg going after trump with the stormy daniels hush money payment. it's not a strong of a case. this one is strong. and we're talking about strong women, well, how about judge chutkan, who's ready to cancel her international vacation that she had all planned to do justice here. but we are waiting on the d.c. circuit court of appeals to rule on absolute presidential immunity. i thought this would have been an opinion delivered a while ago , already now, it's been so long , and times are wasted. hopefully this will start pretty soon. but i'm not holding out too much hope anymore. >> all right then, dave, luke, yamiche, thank you all for starting us off tonight. >

on friday afternoon, judge tanya chutkan officially dropped -- he she says she set a new date after theision on trump's seemingly absurd claim of presidential immunity. which we've been waiting and waiting and waiting for. legal -- andrew weissmann has some thoughts about this delay. he wrote, hey d.c. circuit trump panel, snapped you know. you really making the judiciary look at this point. just in case you are also wondering, and i was, snap into tool is not a legal term, that i'm aware of. though it does certainly stick with you. joining me now is our in-house law firm, finally back together again on a sunday. no cut yelle's former acting u.s. solicitor general, andrew weissmann is the former general counsel of the fbi and a senior member of special counsel robert mueller's team. and he's the coauthor of a new book, i don't know how he's had time to right, coming at the end of the month, called the trump indictments, the historic charging documents with commentary. andrew, let's start with you. your snap under comment is really how all of us feel. it stuck with us. explain what could

today, judge tanya chutkan is indefinitely postponing trump's federal election interference trial asourt to rule on his claim of presidential immunity. in georgia, d. a. fani willis now admits to a personal relationship with the lead prosecutor in the trump trial, man she hired. let's bring in former new york prosecutor and civil rights attorney charles coleman. charles -- charles, is donald trump getting exactly what he wanted, delay is this the best -- >> not yet, stephanie. i think he's on the path that he would like but i think ultimately what we're going to see here is that that's going to have a very quick and short end. and when i say that, what i'm referring to, the fact that while these cases are delayed, the prosecutions are moving forward. expect that donald trump is going to at some point move forward with a motion to dismiss along a stronger ground around election interference because he is being the presumptive nominee. at that point, he would have to delegates necessarily to claim a republican nomination. he's going to try and delay this even further. but it's still go

judge tanya chutkan has officially delayed the start of his federal election interference trial, writing and when trump's presidential immunity claims are resolved. we're still awaiting on that issue a month after a u.s. appeals court heard arguments. all this comes as trump is gearing up for a big court week with the supreme court set to hear his colorado eligibility claim. fred kirschner is joining us for all this. with the election subversion case on hold indefinitely. we heard from neal katyal on our air yesterday that he's in the freak-out stage over indefinitely, right now we heard from neal katyal that he is in the freakout stage over these delays. what's your take? >> i don't know that i'm ready to freak out yet, ana, but i am concerned because if it turns out that our institutions of government were unable to take donald trump to trial for trying to undermine the results of a presidential election, unable to take him to trial in the four years between presidential elections, that will be a very sad result. but you know, there are a couple of dates to look for. there is march 1st

judge tanya chutkan to resume preparations for a trial that could get under way within the next few month. joining me now is andrew weissmann, former fbi general counsel and former senior member of the mueller probe, and catherine christian, former manhattan assistant district attorney and msnbc legal analyst. thank you both for being here. this is the ruling, my friends. this is it. it gave me life today. but it probably shouldn't have taken this long, in my mind. it was brilliantly written. i'm going to start with you, andrew, because yesterday, even the attorneys on the panel, maya wiley was here, we were talking about what our level of freak-out was that this was taking so long. was it worth the wait? >> the decision is great, but just remember where we were at the argument. at the oral argument, there wasn't anyone who was saying donald trump would win. one of the best ways of defeating the argument was when judge pan, one of the three judges, got the lawyer to say, could you just repeat what your argument is? your argument is the president can kill people. and can't be prosecuted. i

tanya chutkan ruled against him, and then, the d. c. circuit upheld chutkan's decision. of getting the supreme court to grant this temporary stay? >> i think it is unlikely that the court will grant a temporary stay. i think it is also very highly likely that the court may just allow the d. c. circuit decision to stand. let me be clear, it is not a question of what the court does, it's a question of when the court will do it. the longer the court spends deliberating on this question, of whether or not to grant certain things, to stay the ruling, means that donald trump has won. we have already blown past the march 4th deadline to begin the trial in d. c., and the further we get from an actual trial date, the more likely it is that donald trump will not go on trial at all. so, the supreme court has a role to play here. the role is in making a decision, and doing so, with some measure of expedition. >> if trump is granted this temporary state by the supreme court, when should we expect to see this trial get underway? >> well, if the state is granted, then, i think, all bet

judge tanya chutkan drop to the march 4th trial date, a historic date against the former president fortting to overturn the 2020 election. it has been long suspected that trump's claim of presidential immunity for prosecution could delay the trial and now it has, with some potentially serious repercussions. joining me now, former federal prosecutor, chrissy greenberg. kristie, welcome. judge chutkan, the trial against donald trump, look, it can move forward until there is a decision on the question of trump's immunity. but how consequential is this delay? >> very consequential. look, we all know that donald trump is using the court system here to delay this trial until after the election, in the hopes that if he wins, he can make this case, go away, and avoid accountability. so far, it's working. but donald trump's immunity argument can and should be easily disposed of. so, what is going on here? well, one theory is that one of these judges, judge henderson, she actually had dissented and not wanted the appeal to be expedited. so, it's possible now as she writes her decision whether sh