ABC 6 NEWS — Following a landmark ruling in which the Supreme Court sided with Former President Donald Trump, deciding that presidents have immunity for “official acts”, ABC 6 News Political Analyst Shane Baker sat down to discuss the implications of the decision.

“As is often the case, the Supreme Court answers one question and probably creates dozens more questions based on their rulings,” Baker said.

The comment came in response to a question surrounding what exactly an “official act” means. Hamline University Law Professor David Schultz said in an interview with ABC 6 News’ sister station KSTP that it could mean the jury will decide at trial what an official is composed of; but it could also mean there would need to be a “mini-trial” before any litigation.

“I think it’s the latter but the court doesn’t give us a lot of clarification on that,” Schultz said in an interview with KSTP.

Baker said, that the definition could be so wide as to practically grant “unlimited immunity.”

“At some level, in our system, where the president is the chief executive and the head of state, there is no time when the president is not being the president,” Baker said. “So a person could claim when is Donald Trump ever not the president. … In that case we’ve given that president unlimited immunity.”

As for one of the criminal cases Trump is facing, where he’s accused of illegally trying to overturn election results, Baker says it will likely have to wait until after the November election.

“With the historic uniqueness, for the novelty of this situation, for the importance, the gravity of this conversation, there can be no rushing [a trial],” Baker said.