A judge on the evening of Sept. 24 granted special counsel Jack Smith’s motion to file an “oversized” brief on presidential immunity in former President Donald Trump’s election interference case.
The judge also responded to arguments presented by Trump’s legal team that such a large motion would be potentially damaging to Trump as he is campaigning for president in the upcoming November election.
“For the second time in a week, Defendant urges reconsideration of the current pretrial schedule in a brief intended to respond to a separate issue, and without actually filing a motion to that effect,” Chutkan wrote in the ruling. “The court has already addressed the scheduling objections Defendant raised when he was given an opportunity to do so.”
Her ruling on Sept. 24 also said that Smith’s brief would resolve problems relating to the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision during the early stages of the trial.
“That is reason enough to grant the present motion,” Chutkan wrote.
“Allowing a brief from the Government is not ‘contrary to law procedure, and custom,’ as Defendant claims. It is simply how litigation works.”
“The Special Counsel’s Office is seeking to release voluminous conclusions to the public, without allowing President Trump to confront their witnesses and present his own, to ensure the document’s public release prior to the 2024 Presidential election,” Trump attorneys Todd Blanche and John Lauro wrote to Chutkan.
His attorneys also cited statements made by former FBI Director James Comey and former Attorney General Loretta Lynch regarding an “unwritten, 60-day rule” that the Department of Justice (DOJ) usually follows during elections. Smith’s proposed filing, they suggested, would violate that unwritten rule because it would come well within 60 days of Nov. 4.
They quoted Comey as saying before the 2016 election, “We avoid taking any action in the run up to an election, if we can avoid it.”
They also cited Lynch’s comment that the DOJ doesn’t take “actions that might have an impact on an election, even if it’s not an election case or something like that.”
In August, Smith’s office filed a revised indictment in the case against the former president, charging him with conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights.
The latest indictment stated that Trump had “no official responsibilities” in how the election was certified but instead had a “personal interest as a candidate in being named the winner of the election.”
During a court appearance in September, Trump’s attorneys entered a not guilty plea to the latest charges. The former president still faces a Nov. 26 sentencing date for his New York criminal case and 2020 election-related charges in Georgia.
A separate Smith case that charged Trump with improperly retaining classified documents and obstructing an investigation in Florida was dismissed by a federal judge in July. Smith has since filed an appeal of the decision to dismiss the matter.
