Jack Smith urges judge to consider immunity as Trump seeks case dismissal

Lawyers representing Donald Trump and special counsel Jack Smith have reached an impasse regarding the former president’s election interference case, as noted in a joint filing submitted late Friday. This disagreement comes shortly after Smith issued a superseding indictment aimed at aligning the charges with the recent ruling by the Supreme Court on presidential immunity.

In the recent filing, Smith did not recommend a timeline for the case, indicating that “decisions on how to manage its docket are firmly within its discretion.” Meanwhile, Trump’s legal team suggested postponing any in-person proceedings until after the upcoming November election.

Back in August, Trump pleaded not guilty to federal charges claiming he orchestrated a “criminal scheme” to overturn the results of the 2020 election and maintain his grip on power. The Supreme Court’s ruling last month established that Trump is entitled to immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken while in office.

In Friday’s joint filing, Smith urged U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to prioritize addressing the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling. Conversely, Trump’s lawyers requested that the court first consider whether Smith’s appointment was constitutionally sound before examining the immunity question.

The filing highlighted the differing approaches of both parties regarding pre-trial motions and scheduling. Smith opted for written briefs regarding presidential immunity instead of in-person evidentiary hearings, which could lead to a preliminary trial before the election. He proposed that if Trump’s team submitted motions on other issues, those should be considered alongside the immunity argument.

This proposed schedule could expedite the process of addressing presidential immunity, potentially allowing the case to advance toward trial. However, should Judge Chutkan rule unfavorably for Trump regarding immunity, he is expected to appeal the decision.

Smith indicated that the government is ready to submit its opening immunity brief whenever the court sees fit. In contrast, Trump’s lawyers have urged Judge Chutkan to first deliberate on the constitutionality of Smith’s role and funding as special counsel—an issue that recently led a judge in Florida to dismiss charges against Trump in his classified documents case.

The defense team suggested conducting a hearing on Smith’s appointment in December, followed by a non-evidentiary hearing regarding immunity at the end of January. Trump’s attorneys expressed confidence in demonstrating that the case should be dismissed on legal grounds.

Furthermore, Trump’s legal representatives indicated intentions to contest the indictment based on the premise that evidence relating to Vice President Mike Pence’s involvement in the certification process was presented to the grand jury, which they argue falls under presidential immunity.

The filing asserted, “If the Court determines, as it should, that the Special Counsel cannot rebut the presumption that these acts are immune, binding law requires that the entire indictment be dismissed because the grand jury considered immunized evidence.”

Previously, Judge Chutkan had set a status conference for September 5 to discuss the next steps in the long-delayed case, which has not had an in-person hearing since last year.

These recent developments related to January 6 represent just one aspect of the legal challenges Trump is facing as the election approaches. In addition, the special counsel’s office has announced plans to appeal a judge’s decision to dismiss charges in Trump’s classified documents case.

Moreover, Trump is scheduled to be sentenced in New York on September 18 after a jury found him guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records. His legal team has been actively seeking to delay this impending sentencing, including attempts to transfer the case to federal court.

In their filing, Trump’s attorneys emphasized the gravity of the situation, stating, “At that potential sentencing, President Trump faces the prospect of immediate and unlawful incarceration under New York law, which could prevent him from continuing to pursue his leading campaign for the Presidency.”

As both parties prepare for the forthcoming legal battles, the outcome of these proceedings may considerably influence Trump’s political aspirations in the months leading up to the election.

Source: ABC News