The question of whether a President is immune from criminal prosecution has not come up in the past because it really wasn't something the founders may have considered. That changed once Donald Trump entered the White House and basically did whatever he wanted.
The Conservative members of the Supreme Court appointed by Trump paid him back on Monday by ruling, along with the other Conservative justices, that Presidents were immune from prosecution if it was an 'official act.' Congressman Eric Swalwell opined that the ruling won't save Trump from prosecutor Jack Smith.
The California Rep. wrote today, "Don’t panic on Trump immunity case. Jack Smith will argue Trump’s actions were not “official acts.” There’s precedent on this from a J6 civil case *that I know a thing or two about* that was unanimously upheld by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. This is not a Trump victory."
Swalwell continued, "It certainly means the criminal case doesn’t get tried before the election. But Smith can articulate for the Court what the official acts are and then proceed. Of course, Trump can take that back up to SCOTUS. *Civil side cases have rejected that what he did was an official act."
You can see the entire post here.