Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
The Trump Cases : Judge allows lengthy brief in Trump case, rejecting claim of election impact
The judge granted the special counsel’s request to file an up-to-180-page brief in the election interference case, over Trump lawyers’ objection.
By Spencer S. Hsu
September 24, 2024 at 4:16 p.m.
September 24, 2024 at 4:16 p.m.
CT
A federal judge on Tuesday granted prosecutors’ request to file an up-to-180-page legal brief this week arguing why Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election should not be immune from criminal prosecution, rejecting the former president’s claims that its timing was unfair or politically motivated with the election fast approaching.
U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan agreed with special counsel Jack Smith’s office, which argued that the extra-long briefing was necessary because the Supreme Court’s July ruling on presidential immunity required her as trial judge to decide what allegations and evidence against Trump could be admissible.
“The Supreme Court directed this court to conduct a ‘close’ and ‘fact specific’ analysis ‘of the indictment’s extensive and interrelated allegations,’” including Trump’s alleged interactions with state officials and private actors and his communications, Chutkan wrote in a nine-page opinion that quoted from the Supreme Court ruling. “The length and breadth of the Government’s proposed brief reflects the uniquely ‘challenging’ and factbound nature of those determinations. The briefs’ atypical sequence and size thus both serve the efficient resolution of immunity issues in this case ‘at the earliest possible stage.’”
The filing is a key part of the criminal case alleging Trump illegally attempted to overturn Joe Biden’s electoral victory, and prosecutors said it would include up to 90 pages of previously disclosed evidence as well as new facts, and 30 pages of footnotes to attached exhibits. But new details will initially be kept under seal, as prosecutors requested, with a public version with redactions to be released later with Chutkan’s approval. The filing is due Thursday and prosecutors indicated they would have it to the court by 5 p.m., but it remains unclear exactly which portions will be made public and when.
U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan agreed with special counsel Jack Smith’s office, which argued that the extra-long briefing was necessary because the Supreme Court’s July ruling on presidential immunity required her as trial judge to decide what allegations and evidence against Trump could be admissible.
“The Supreme Court directed this court to conduct a ‘close’ and ‘fact specific’ analysis ‘of the indictment’s extensive and interrelated allegations,’” including Trump’s alleged interactions with state officials and private actors and his communications, Chutkan wrote in a nine-page opinion that quoted from the Supreme Court ruling. “The length and breadth of the Government’s proposed brief reflects the uniquely ‘challenging’ and factbound nature of those determinations. The briefs’ atypical sequence and size thus both serve the efficient resolution of immunity issues in this case ‘at the earliest possible stage.’”
The filing is a key part of the criminal case alleging Trump illegally attempted to overturn Joe Biden’s electoral victory, and prosecutors said it would include up to 90 pages of previously disclosed evidence as well as new facts, and 30 pages of footnotes to attached exhibits. But new details will initially be kept under seal, as prosecutors requested, with a public version with redactions to be released later with Chutkan’s approval. The filing is due Thursday and prosecutors indicated they would have it to the court by 5 p.m., but it remains unclear exactly which portions will be made public and when.
No paywall link
https://wapo.st/3N4hNnv