WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday officially sent the federal criminal case against Donald Trump for election interference back to a judge in Washington after deciding last month that presidents have broad immunity from prosecution.

The ruling was issued July 1, but it takes about a month to be entered into the court record. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan must now figure out how to implement the 6-3 decision in the case against Trump, who was president at the time when prosecutors say he illegally conspired to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

Chutkan will resume the long-delayed case after Trump formally became the Republican Party’s presidential nominee and just three months before the Nov. 5 general election. The judge’s next steps likely will be to decide how she wants to proceed, which could include in-person hearings to consider arguments and evidence, and how quickly to move.

Presidents are entitled to broad immunity against charges tied to their official acts, and Trump is at least partially shielded against a federal indictment for his post-election conduct, the high court’s conservative majority ruled. Special Counsel Jack Smith’s case against Trump had been on hold for months awaiting the decision.

The justices directed Chutkan to determine which allegations in the indictment involved official acts by Trump. They said “core” presidential functions are clearly shielded from prosecution and that Trump couldn’t be charged for his discussions with Justice Department officials after the election.

However, the Supreme Court didn’t make a final call on the fate of other key elements of the indictment, including Trump’s alleged efforts to pressure then-Vice President Mike Pence to interfere with Congress’ certification of the results, his alleged involvement in the recruitment of pro-Trump electors to sign documents falsely declaring him the victor in battleground states, and his actions on Jan. 6, 2021, when thousands of his supporters rioted at the US Capitol.

Chutkan’s next ruling on the immunity question could immediately be appealed and possibly land before the justices again.

©2024 Bloomberg L.P. Visit bloomberg.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.