Former President Donald Trump’s lawyer said Thursday that special counsel Jack Smith’s election interference case has failed based on recent Supreme Court precedent.
The Supreme Court’s decision in Fisher v. United States curtails the Biden-Harris Department of Justice’s (DOJ) widespread use of obstruction laws to shred corporate documents against defendants on January 6th, Two of Trump’s lawyers were dismissed, saying it “fatally undermined” the cause of action. I wrote.
The Fisher decision is another example of the Supreme Court applying the “rule of law to deny targets of the law’s overreach” to President Trump, his lawyer said, adding to the national effort to remove him from the ballot. The former president is immune from prosecution for his conduct in office while in office, rejecting the law and citing two other previous rulings that found the former president to be fraudulent. (Related: Judge Chutkan releases Jack Smith’s extensive brief detailing evidence against Trump)
“Under Fisher, authorities will use the law as a blanket provision to criminalize lawful activities that are selectively and incorrectly characterized as nuisance by people with opposing political views. “We cannot do that,” Fisher’s attorney told Judge Tanya Chutkan.
Since the decision, the Justice Department has found that the Supreme Court “severely undermined its standing” in at least 100 of the 259 defendants charged or convicted under the obstruction law on January 6. This is stated in the submitted documents.
WAUNAKEE, WI – OCTOBER 1: Republican presidential candidate and former President Donald Trump leaves a campaign event at Dane Manufacturing Co. on October 1, 2024 in Waunakee, Wisconsin. The event is the first of two the former president will hold in battleground states today. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)
Mr. Smith filed an extensive motion Wednesday detailing the evidence against Mr. Trump, but Mr. Chutkan has repeatedly argued from Mr. Trump’s lawyers that it is politically motivated and violates standard procedure. His submission was allowed due to objections. The filing outlines why prosecutors believe their priority charges are not subject to the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision.
Trump’s lawyers wrote Thursday that prosecutors used “fanciful and imprecise language to describe the conduct of President Trump and his advisers that is subject to presidential immunity.” (Related: Biden Justice Department drops nearly half of pending obstruction charges against defendant on January 6, following Supreme Court ruling)
“As President Trump will make clear in his forthcoming response to the agency’s request for presidential immunity, the conduct at issue should be accurately described and placed in context, and the agency’s misguided rhetoric removed. , qualifies as a public service because it was conducted to ensure the integrity and fairness of the “proper administration of federal elections,” they wrote.
Mr. Trump’s lawyers are expected to file a response to Mr. Smith’s immunity motion by November 7, following an extension request. partially Given by Chutkan.
All content produced by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent, nonpartisan news distribution service, is available free of charge to legitimate news publishers with large audiences. All republished articles must include our logo, reporter byline, and DCNF affiliation. If you have any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact us at licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
