The Supreme Court's decision on presidential immunity on Monday is likely to add new twists to the already stalled case brought by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis in the US state of Georgia against former President Donald Trump and his allies.

The Georgia case, which involves some of the same issues as special counsel Jack Smith's indictment of Trump on federal election interference charges, was officially stayed last month. An appeals court is scheduled to hear arguments from Trump and some of his co-defendants challenging the presiding judge's decision not to disqualify Willis as a prosecutor until at least October.

Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee has not yet set a trial date, and one of the motions pending before him concerns Trump's attempt to dismiss the charges by citing presidential immunity.

The Supreme Court ruled largely in Trump's favor in the federal case on Monday, finding that he was entitled to immunity for some of his conduct in office and that he could be entitled to immunity for other acts as well.

Willis' office declined to comment on the ruling. Trump's attorney Steve Sadow referred a request for comment to Trump's campaign team, which did not immediately respond.

NBC News legal expert Barbara McQuade, a former U.S. attorney, said the Georgia case “will now be subject to the same scrutiny as the federal case.”

“Trump will seek dismissal of the case on immunity grounds, and a hearing will be required to determine what is official and what is unofficial conduct in the indictment,” she said in an email.

The Supreme Court's 6-3 decision said Trump's contacts with Justice Department officials related to his claims of election fraud are protected by immunity and that he is also “presumptively immune” from prosecution for his contacts with then-Vice President Mike Pence in the weeks leading up to the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol. Those contacts are also cited in the Georgia case.

The ruling did not resolve the immunity issue related to Trump's contacts with people outside the federal government, including Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger. Trump's Jan. 2, 2021, phone call in which he asked Raffensperger to “find” more votes than Joe Biden had in the state is a central part of the Fulton County case, as are efforts to secure so-called alternate electors for Trump.

The Supreme Court's ruling in the federal case said that determining whether or not such actions were official acts requires “a careful analysis” by the judge, including “an evaluation of numerous alleged interactions with a wide range of government officials and private individuals.”

Atlanta attorney Allegra Lawrence-Hardy said that when the official stay of proceedings in Fulton County is eventually lifted, there will be more litigation over whether or not certain Trump actions were official, leading to more appeals and delays.

Because it is a state-level case, Trump would not be able to end the case if he wins the election in November, unlike he theoretically could with the two federal criminal cases pending against him. However, Sadow, Trump's lawyer, argued to McAfee in December that if Trump is re-elected, he could not be tried until after he leaves office.

“I believe that because of the supremacy clause and his duties as President of the United States, this trial would not take place until after his term ends,” Sadow said at the time.

Norm Eisen, who worked for House Democrats during Trump's first impeachment trial, said the Supreme Court's broad interpretation of presidential immunity in its ruling Monday could lead to lawsuits from two of Trump's co-defendants in the Georgia case: former Justice Department civil lawyer Jeffrey Clark and former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows.

At the Justice Department, Clark tried to use his position to push Trump's baseless claims of election fraud, while Meadows was accused of being involved in attempts to pressure state officials in the state of Georgia.

Eisen noted that Meadows had previously argued unsuccessfully that his involvement in the 2020 election was due to his official duties. That claim was rejected by a federal judge and a federal appeals court. A judge also rejected similar arguments from Clark; his appeal is pending.

For Meadows, “there's still a pretty clear line for prosecutors to follow,” Eisen said. “The same is probably true for Clark, but this decision has a few additional twists.”

Joyce Vance, a legal expert at NBC News, said Monday's ruling is likely to further prolong the already lengthy proceedings in Georgia.

“We've seen how slow the process is in Georgia – it takes a long time to fight and litigate,” she said, adding that some parameters of the Supreme Court's decision remain unclear.

“Nobody should pretend that the report is easy to read. It will take time to analyze it,” Vance said. “It is very complex.”