Former U.S. President Donald Trump once again finds himself in the center of legal complications as the Supreme Court raised questions regarding his claim to immunity from prosecution. The case caught the attention of major international news outlets, including Reuters, drawing significant interest due to its potential implications for the understanding of Presidential powers.

Trump's legal team faced a great deal of scrutiny from the Justices of Supreme Court on Thursday. The focal point of the discussion revolved around the claim made by the former President asserting his immunity from prosecution. The complex debate sparked a myriad of questions exploring the depths of Presidential immunity and its limits.

As is customary, neither Trump nor his legal team made any direct public statements or comments regarding the discussion held in the Supreme Court. Such reserve is often maintained due to the seriousness and cruciality of the matters involved in Supreme Court proceedings.

The controversial claim of immunity, if accepted, would set a significant precedent in American politics and law. Traditionally, no person, regardless of their position, is considered above the law in the democratic framework of the United States. This principle has been evident from the very foundations of the country where even the highest office bearers are held accountable for any unlawful activities.

There is no confirmation yet as to how the Justices reacted to Trump's immunity assertion. The final decision by the Supreme Court will be integral in further interpreting and establishing the efficacy and boundaries of Presidential immunity.

As the court proceedings continue to unfold, observers and legal scholars express keen interest on this topic, especially considering its potential to redefine some essential aspects of the United States' democratic system.

As this case progresses, international and local media houses – including Reuters –will continue to trace developments closely, thereby keeping people informed about the evolution of this significant judicial event. Irrespective of the outcome, this case will undeniably leave a deep impression on the US political and judicial landscape.