According to Slay News, in a politically charged move, Special Counsel Jack Smith has expedited his case against former President Donald Trump on behalf of the Democrats, aiming to push for a trial in 2024 before the presidential election. Smith’s recent maneuver involves bypassing the appeals court and seeking the immediate intervention of the United States Supreme Court to address the issue of Trump’s claimed immunity from prosecution.
The Democrats’ apparent goal is to disrupt Trump’s potential 2024 election campaign and tarnish his image in the eyes of voters through a trial. Despite Smith’s efforts to fast-track the legal proceedings, there are indications that the Supreme Court’s involvement might actually lead to significant delays, possibly extending the trial start date beyond the conclusion of the election.
The legal dispute revolves around Trump’s assertion that he retains presidential immunity for actions taken while in office, a claim rejected by D.C. District Judge Tanya Chutkan. Trump appealed to the D.C. Circuit Court, following standard procedure, but Smith skipped this step, opting to directly involve the Supreme Court in an attempt to expedite the resolution of the immunity dispute.
While Smith advocates for a speedy resolution, the lack of a clear explanation for the urgency raises suspicions that the rush is a strategic move to ensure a trial before the 2024 election. The Trump campaign has criticized Smith’s actions as an attempt to interfere in the election and prevent Trump from retaking the presidency.
However, the tactic of prematurely involving the Supreme Court may have backfired, as Judge Chutkan has granted a motion from Trump’s attorneys to stay the proceedings, likely delaying the scheduled March 4, 2024 trial start date until the appeals process is complete. The Trump campaign sees this as a victory for the rule of law and a setback for Smith’s attempt to influence the 2024 election.
In a separate development, the Supreme Court has taken up a case challenging a felony obstruction charge applied to Trump and numerous Capitol riot defendants. If the court rules against the expansive interpretation of the obstruction statute, it could significantly undermine the prosecution of Trump and others involved in the January 6 Capitol riot.
