SCOTUS likely to let appeals court have last word on 'problematic' Trump pleading: expert

Appearing on MSNBC, former U.S. Attorney Carol Lam stated she didn't see the Supreme Court interested in stepping into the fight between Donald Trump and his lawyers with special counsel Jack Smith over whether the former president has wide-ranging immunity from being charged with crimes.

Reacting to a filing made by Smith on Saturday outlining the types of crimes a blanket immunity ruling could cover, Lam told MSNBC host Paola Ramos that she thinks the nation's highest court will let the D.C. Court of Appeals have the final word.

"What I think the Supreme Court may be thinking is, we are going to let the appellate court consider the issue first, and they've set a very expedited briefing and argument schedule for this," she began. "They're going to hear this argument in mid-January. So, if the Supreme Court or the majority of the Supreme Court fundamentally agrees with whatever the D.C. Circuit says, they may just decide not to take the case up in the Supreme Court, and just let the District of Columbia Appeals Court opinion stand."

"That way the Supreme Court will not have to actually render the ultimate decision on this case; they can just decline to take the case up and then they can leave for another day, deciding this particular issue as to the scope of presidential immunity," she continued. "But I do think that Jack Smith has the better argument because he's raised a number of potential scenarios that would be very problematic if a president could do anything he wanted with respect to trying to stay in office and could not be prosecuted for those things."

ALSO READ: Marjorie Taylor Greene has Jan. 6 anniversary plans

"I think that would be a very problematic position for the Supreme Court or even the D.C. Circuit to agree with," she added.

Watch below or at the link.