Today, Trump’s legal team got to lay out their case for why he should enjoy absolute immunity for actions taken while he was president. It did not, uh, make a ton of sense—and it seems like the three appeals court judges picked up on this. (Trump’s federal election interference trial, which was scheduled to begin on March 4, has been on pause while his attempt to get the whole thing dismissed on these grounds works its way through the appeals process.) Jeremy Stahl picks apart the logic behind the Trump team’s political immunity claim. And the stakes are high: “It’s no exaggeration to say that these cases could determine whether constitutional democracy as the United States has known it lives or dies,” Stahl writes.

Plus: Dennis Aftergut explains why the new Jan. 6 evidence that is now in Jack Smith’s hands would be devastating for Trump at trial.

© Slate