District Judge Tanya Chutkan on Thursday declined to charge special prosecutor Jack Smith with contempt of court.

Chutkan froze proceedings in the case while former President Donald Trump's appeal to dismiss the case under executive privilege was pending, but prosecutors continued to submit documents within the suspended deadline, prompting Trump to He requested that Chutkan be charged with contempt for violating the court's rules of court. order. Mr. Chutkan was appointed by President Obama. answered Thursday's order noted that her order does not expressly prevent the government from pursuing the application voluntarily.

“The fundamental function of a deadline is not to approve a submission, but to limit it. Accordingly, lifting a deadline lifts that deadline, but does not necessarily prohibit submission.” she wrote.

“Because the cease and desist order appears to be interpreted differently by the parties, the court will clarify that if a defendant wishes to challenge the government's announcement, the power of attorney will be returned and the court If a decision is made, we will set a new schedule that you can appeal without risk of disenfranchisement,” she wrote. “Contrary to defendant's assertions, the court has not and will not establish a deadline in this case based on the premise that defendant made unnecessary preparations.” (Related: President Trump's lawyer accuses Jack Smith of collaborating with Biden administration to hide evidence)

Last Minute: Judge Chutkan instructs parties to the J6/election subversion case not to file new motions without first “seeking a stay from the court.”
This follows President Trump's attempt to hold Jack Smith in contempt for filing the report despite a cease and desist order.https://t.co/jIhSuKOJhq

— Alan Feuer (@alanfeuer) January 18, 2024

The judge noted that Trump's lawyers were not required to review or respond to the government's filings. Nevertheless, she agreed to prohibit all parties from filing “further substantive pretrial motions without first asking the court for a stay.”

“This action is in addition to the cease and desist order and is intended to further that purpose, and does not reflect a determination that the government has violated clear and unambiguous terms or acted in bad faith. No,” Chutkan wrote.

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.