A group of nineteen retired military officers, including former four-star generals and admirals, as well as past secretaries of the U.

S. military branches, have submitted an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court.

They are opposing former President Donald Trump's plea for immunity from prosecution, arguing that such a concession could pose a significant threat to national security.

The Supreme Court is scheduled to consider Trump's argument for presidential immunity on April 25, as reported by The Gateway Pundit. The court's decision, which may not be delivered until late June, according to analysts, could have substantial implications for the timeline of Special Counsel Jack Smith's case against Trump. This could potentially postpone the commencement of the trial until after the 2024 election.

WATCH BEN SHAPIRO ERUPTS ON “CORRUPT COMMENTATORS”

Trump's legal team had appealed to the Supreme Court to delay the decision on immunity in relation to Jack Smith's January 6 case in Washington, D.C. This appeal followed a ruling by a federal appeals court, which included appointees of President Joe Biden, denying Trump immunity. The three-judge panel of the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, comprising Judges Florence Pan and Michelle Childs (both Biden appointees), and Karen Henderson (a George W. Bush appointee), underscored the necessity of allowing the prosecution to proceed, citing public interest and governmental structure.

WATCH: PAWN SHOP OWNER "NEVER SEEN STUFF LIKE THIS IN MY LIFE!"

Trump's lawyers have staunchly maintained that a former president is immune from federal prosecution for alleged offenses committed while in office. "In 234 years of American history, no president ever faced criminal prosecution for his official acts. Until 19 days ago, no court had ever addressed whether immunity from such prosecution exists," Trump's lawyers wrote, according to CBS News. "To this day, no appellate court has addressed it. The question stands among the most complex, intricate, and momentous issues that this Court will be called on to decide.”

SOCIAL MEDIA STORM: GREEN PARTY SENATE CANDIDATE LINKS EARTHQUAKE TO CLIMATE CHANGE

The group of retired military officers warns of potential threats to national security and democratic principles if Trump's claims of presidential immunity for official acts are accepted. Their 38-page brief, signed by officials who have served under both Democratic and Republican administrations dating back to the era of former President John F. Kennedy, warns that Trump's legal theory could establish a dangerous precedent.

NEW FOX NATION SPECIAL: FBI INVESTIGATORS UNVEIL OMINOUS BREAKTHROUGHS IN INFAMOUS 'UNABOMBER' CASE

The group argues that if the theory of absolute immunity prevails, it could "risk jeopardizing America’s standing as a guardian of democracy in the world and further feeding the spread of authoritarianism, thereby threatening the national security of the United States and democracies around the world.”

DEMOCRATS NAIVELY BELIEVE ANTI-TRUMP SENTIMENT ALONE CAN SECURE VICTORY—SPOILER ALERT: IT CAN'T!

The retired military officials also express concerns about the potential chaos and security risks that could ensue if a President faced no accountability for criminal actions aimed at obstructing a peaceful transition of power. They outline scenarios where conflicting directives from the Joint Chiefs of Staff could endanger service members and compromise America’s national security and leadership role in the world.

BEHIND CLOSED DOORS: THE TRUTH ABOUT THE PENTAGON'S SECRETIVE ABORTION POLICY

The retired four-star admirals and generals, along with former military secretaries, urge the rejection of the claimed immunity. They emphasize the critical need to uphold the rule of law, accountability, and the peaceful transition of power to safeguard national security and democratic principles.

FLORIDA TEACHERS ON EDGE: UNION'S MOVE COULD LEAVE THEM WITHOUT REPRESENTATION

It is worth noting that the U.S. Supreme Court has addressed presidential immunity in several landmark cases, including Nixon v. Fitzgerald (1982). In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the President is entitled to absolute immunity from civil liability for actions taken within the official duties of the presidency. This means that while in office, the President cannot be sued for damages related to official actions.