The Trump immunity decision is about to drop. Here’s how it might go.

The Supreme Court saved its biggest decision for last.

The justices will finally decide on Monday, the final day before their annual summer recess, whether Donald Trump has immunity from the most serious criminal charges against him: the federal indictment for trying to subvert the 2020 election and stay in power.

How the court answers the immunity question could determine whether there remains even an outside chance that Trump will face a jury on those charges before Election Day. No matter the outcome, the ruling will be a landmark: It will be the first time the high court weighs in on whether a president can be criminally prosecuted for actions he took while in office.

“We’re writing a rule for the ages,” Justice Neil Gorsuch said at the April oral arguments in the case.

Trump has claimed that he has “presidential immunity” from the four felony charges leveled by special counsel Jack Smith, who has accused the former president of conspiring to derail the peaceful transfer of power and disenfranchise millions of voters in the 2020 election.

Trump contends that many of his efforts to reverse the election were part of his official duties as president — and he says former presidents cannot be prosecuted for any such “official” acts. Smith counters that Trump’s immunity theory would be anathema to the nation’s founders and would effectively elevate presidents above the law.

Two lower courts sided with Smith, but the Supreme Court — which has a six-justice conservative supermajority, including three Trump appointees — agreed to review the issue. For months, as the justices have mulled the case, all trial proceedings on the federal election charges have been stalled . And the high court’s unhurried treatment of the case has made it increasingly unlikely that a trial can occur before November, even if the justices reject Trump’s aggressive notion of “absolute” immunity.

Their decision, expected shortly after 10 a.m. eastern, is unlikely to affect Trump’s classified documents case (which concerns conduct after he left office) or his recent conviction in the New York hush money case (which concerned conduct totally unrelated to his presidential duties).

Here are three scenarios for what the Supreme Court might do.

Toss out the indictment

The Supreme Court could rule that Trump is totally immune from all four charges in Smith’s indictment. This scenario is considered the least likely, but if the justices adopt it, they would effectively end the federal prosecution of Trump for subverting the 2020 election.

To reach this sweeping result, the high court likely would have to conclude that former presidents have broad immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts — and that the specific acts of misconduct alleged in Smith’s indictment were largely official, not private conduct. Those specific acts include Trump’s assembling of false slates of electors, his use of the Justice Department to bolster false claims of voter fraud, and his pressure on state officials — and his own vice president — to overturn Joe Biden’s victory.

Trump and his lawyers have argued that, without blanket immunity, all future presidents could be subject to politically motivated prosecutions after they leave office. During oral arguments, some justices seemed sympathetic to that concern, and the court may seek a nuanced decision that tries to guard against the future prospect of systematic prosecutions of ex-presidents. But an outright declaration of total immunity for Trump’s 2020 election efforts would be a shock.

Allow the case to proceed toward trial

On the other extreme, the court could reject Trump’s immunity bid wholesale and allow the prosecution to immediately resume in the trial court.

A clear-cut ruling along these lines might preserve a slight possibility for the trial to begin before the election this fall — but prosecutors and the trial judge, Tanya Chutkan, would have to move swiftly to get it back on track.

In earlier rulings, both Chutkan and a federal appeals court resoundingly rejected Trump’s immunity argument. There are a few ways the Supreme Court might reach the same result. The justices could rule that former presidents simply have no immunity from criminal prosecution for their official acts. They could rule that some immunity exists for some official acts, but that Trump’s allegedly official acts in the election case aren’t covered by that immunity. Or they could rule that all of the actions described in Smith’s indictment were not “official” at all, but were purely private acts, and so immunity cannot apply.

Partial immunity or some other middle ground

Many constitutional scholars and Supreme Court prognosticators believe the court will not hand either side a definitive victory but will instead issue some sort of mixed-bag ruling.

For instance, the court might say in general terms that former presidents have immunity for official acts and announce a legal test for deciding when a presidential action is “official.” The justices might then send the case back to the lower courts for them to apply the new test and determine which of Trump’s acts alleged in the indictment are official and which are private. Those proceedings could take weeks or months and could even prompt Chutkan to hold extensive evidentiary hearings.

Or the court might say there is no immunity for official acts but then turn to a related question: Whether the criminal laws that Trump is accused of breaking can constitutionally be applied to the president. Some scholars have argued that generally worded criminal laws should not be interpreted to limit the official conduct of a president, and during oral arguments, Justice Brett Kavanaugh seemed particularly interested in that theory. It’s possible that this issue, too, could require further proceedings in the lower courts.

If the justices do order further hearings, the most important next question will be: How long will those hearings take? Every additional day of delay bolsters Trump’s strategy of postponing the trial until after the election. If he wins, he could order the Justice Department to shut down the case.