Special counsel Jack Smith has presented a detailed strategy outlining how prosecutors intend to build their case against former President Donald Trump, who is charged with orchestrating an illegal plan to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. This filing, made public on Wednesday, sheds new light on Trump’s “increasingly desperate” attempts to retain power, despite numerous efforts by those around him to convince him he had lost the presidency. The case, which is central to Trump’s ongoing legal battles, could play a significant role in the upcoming presidential election, scheduled for just over a month away.
The Republican presidential nominee has consistently labeled the case against him as politically motivated. In an interview with NewsNation, Trump referred to the filing as “pure election interference” and accused the government of “weaponization” against him.
The Prosecutors’ Claims
At the heart of the legal maneuver is an attempt to persuade U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan that the charges against Trump should move forward, despite a Supreme Court ruling in July that granted former presidents broad immunity from prosecution. The ruling established that former presidents have a presumptive immunity for actions taken in their official capacity. However, the court clarified that this protection does not extend to actions performed in a private capacity.
Smith’s team is building a case around the argument that Trump acted not as a president but as a private candidate for office when he attempted to overturn the election results. This distinction is crucial because it strips Trump of the immunity usually afforded to a sitting or former president. As the prosecution put it, Trump “must stand trial for his private crimes as would any other citizen.”
Prosecutors assert that while Trump was still the sitting president during the events in question, his actions were rooted in his role as a candidate, not a commander-in-chief. “Although the defendant was the incumbent President during the charged conspiracies, his scheme was fundamentally a private one,” they wrote in the filing. Working alongside private co-conspirators, Trump allegedly engaged in a fraudulent scheme to disrupt the lawful process of vote collection and counting. As prosecutors emphasize, this was a process in which Trump, as president, had no official role.
The Path Leading to This Point
The road to this latest legal development has been long and complex. The trial was originally scheduled for March in Washington’s federal court. However, proceedings were delayed in December last year when Trump’s legal team filed appeals claiming broad presidential immunity. Trump’s team argued that prosecuting a former president for official acts would erode the vital independence of the presidency.
While the Supreme Court declined to dismiss the case outright, it did remove some of the charges relating to Trump’s interactions with the Justice Department. The court sent the case back to Judge Chutkan to determine which of the remaining allegations pertain to Trump’s official duties and which could be categorized as actions taken in a private capacity, potentially subject to prosecution.
In August, Smith’s team adjusted the indictment to align with the Supreme Court’s ruling. Although the criminal charges remained unchanged, the scope of the allegations was narrowed.
What’s Next?
As the legal battle continues, Trump’s defense team has criticized the prosecution’s recent filing, accusing them of trying to influence public opinion and damage Trump’s campaign in the critical weeks before the election. Trump’s legal team will soon have the opportunity to respond to Smith’s arguments. While Trump’s response was originally due later in October, the defense was granted an extension by Judge Chutkan, moving the deadline to November 7.
Trump’s lawyers are also actively working to have the case dismissed. On Thursday, the defense filed additional legal documents, arguing that prosecutors have overextended the law by suggesting that Trump is responsible for the events of January 6, 2021, when rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol.
The defense insists that Trump’s discussions with his vice president and efforts to influence state election officials were integral to his responsibilities as president, not actions outside the scope of his role. John Lauro, Trump’s attorney, argued in a recent hearing that the Supreme Court’s ruling necessitates the case’s dismissal. However, Judge Chutkan has made it clear that she does not share this view.
Even if the judge ultimately sides with the prosecution, the trial will not proceed in the near future. Any rulings by Judge Chutkan are expected to be appealed, potentially sending the case back to the Supreme Court.
There is also the question of what happens if Trump wins the 2024 election. Should he prevail over Vice President Kamala Harris, he would have the power to appoint an attorney general who could seek to dismiss the case, along with other federal charges Trump faces. Additionally, Trump could attempt to pardon himself if convicted.
Political Ramifications
The latest filing has provided fresh material for Democrats as they campaign against Trump. It serves as a reminder to voters of the serious allegations surrounding the former president, even as ballots have already been cast in some states ahead of Election Day.
Trump, however, has been quick to capitalize on the filing, portraying it as yet another politically motivated attempt by his adversaries to weaken his campaign. This strategy has resonated strongly with his base and has significantly boosted his fundraising efforts.
Despite the new details in the filing, it is unclear how much it will affect voters’ decisions. Much of the information about Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election has been in the public domain for some time. Additionally, Trump is facing multiple indictments, which may lessen the impact of this particular case on public opinion.
Polling data suggests that voters are more concerned with economic issues than with the defense of democratic institutions. For instance, a recent CNN poll revealed that 4 in 10 likely voters cited the economy as their top issue when deciding how to vote, compared to 2 in 10 who identified protecting democracy as their primary concern.
Protecting democracy seems to resonate more with Democratic voters, particularly those already backing Harris. Approximately 4 in 10 Harris supporters identified it as their top priority. In contrast, among Republicans and Trump supporters, the economy remains the dominant issue, with 6 in 10 naming it as their top concern. Immigration follows as the second most important issue. Only 5% of Trump supporters view protecting democracy as their main concern.
As the 2024 election approaches, the legal and political ramifications of this case will continue to unfold. Whether or not Trump’s legal battles ultimately sway voters remains to be seen.