Special counsel Jack Smith has asked that his federal election interference case against President-elect Donald Trump be dismissed because of a long-standing Justice Department policy that prohibits the prosecution of a sitting president.
Nearly 16 months after a grand jury first indicted Trump for his alleged efforts to illegally overturn the results of the 2020 election, Smith has asked District Judge Tanya Chutkan to dismiss the case ahead of the impending takeover. Trump’s inauguration, according to a motion filed Monday.
Earlier this month, Judge Chutkan canceled the remaining deadlines in the case after Smith asked for time to “evaluate this unprecedented circumstance and determine the appropriate course to follow consistent with Department of Justice policy” following the election of Trump.
Trump pleaded not guilty last year to federal charges that he pursued a “criminal scheme” to overturn the results of the 2020 election by enlisting a list of so-called “fake voters,” using the Justice Department to conduct “investigations.” false claims of election crimes,” attempting to recruit the vice president to “alter election results” and promoting false claims of a stolen election during the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, all in an effort to subvert democracy and remain in office. can.
Smith later charged Trump in a superseding indictment that was adjusted to respect the Supreme Court’s July ruling that Trump is entitled to criminal immunity for official acts performed as president.
Judge Chutkan had been considering how the case should proceed in light of the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling.
Smith had faced Dec. 2 filing deadlines for both the election interference case and the classified documents cases against Trump, after Smith’s team requested more time to determine how to deal with the unprecedented situation of pending federal cases against someone who had just been elected to the presidency.
Filing this request a week ahead of schedule now raises the question of whether Smith will be able to beat the clock to officially close his office and submit his final report to Attorney General Merrick Garland – as required by the special counsel’s rules. of the Department of Justice – before Inauguration Day.
The final report will have to go through a classification review by the intelligence community, a process that can sometimes take weeks before it is approved for any type of public release.
This is a developing story. Please check back on this page for updates.
Copyright © 2024 ABC News Internet Ventures.
Given the unique circumstances of prosecuting a sitting President-elect, what measures could the Department of Justice take to ensure public trust and transparency in its proceedings while upholding the principles of due process and fairness?
## Interview: The Unprecedented Case of President-Elect Trump
**Welcome to World Today News.** We are joined today by two esteemed guests to discuss the latest developments in the federal election interference case against President-elect Donald Trump.
Let me introduce our guests:
* **Dr. Emily Carter**, Professor of Constitutional Law at [University Name], and author of several groundbreaking books on Presidential power and accountability.
* **Mr. Andrew Jackson**, Former federal prosecutor with extensive experience in election law and white-collar crime cases.
**Thank you both for joining us. This is a truly unprecedented situation, so let’s dive right in.**
**Section 1: The Department of Justice Policy**
* **Dr. Carter, the special counsel has cited a long-standing Department of Justice policy that prohibits the prosecution of a sitting president. Can you elaborate on the history and rationale behind this policy, and how it applies to this specific case?**
* **Mr. Jackson, some argue that the policy is outdated and should be revised to ensure accountability for high-ranking officials. What are your thoughts on this argument, particularly in light of the gravity of the charges against President-elect Trump?**
**Section 2: The Supreme Court Ruling’s Impact**
* **The recent Supreme Court ruling granting President Trump immunity for official acts while in office has complicated the case significantly. Dr. Carter, how does this ruling impact the special counsel’s ability to present a compelling case against the President-elect?**
* **Mr. Jackson, do you believe this ruling sets a dangerous precedent for future presidents, potentially shielding them from legal accountability for potentially criminal actions taken during their term?**
**Section 3: The Future of the Case**
* **The special counsel has requested the dismissal of the case. Mr. Jackson, what might the potential ramifications be for such a dismissal, both for the case itself and for the broader perception of the justice system?**
* **Dr. Carter, the special counsel faces a tight deadline to wrap up his investigation and submit his final report. What are the potential challenges he faces in meeting this deadline, and what level of transparency can we expect from the Department of Justice regarding the report’s findings?**
**Section 4: Broader Implications**
* **This case raises profound questions about the balance between presidential power and accountability. Dr. Carter, what are the long-term implications of this case for American democracy and the rule of law?**
* **Mr. Jackson, we are witnessing a highly polarized political climate. How do you see this case playing out in that context, and what message does it send to the American people?**
**Thank you both for sharing your insights and helping us understand this complex and impactful legal situation. This is certainly a story we will continue to follow closely.**
