Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?


Jack Smith’s Trump Case Abruptly Removed from Court Docket

via CBS News
This article was originally published at Publications approved for syndication have permission to republish this article, such as Microsoft News, Yahoo News, Newsbreak, UltimateNewswire and others. To learn more about syndication opportunities, visit About Us.

The trial date for former President Donald Trump related to the events of Jan. 6, 2020, has been removed from the Washington, D.C., federal court calendar, indicating a likely delay due to Trump’s appeal on immunity from prosecution.

Speculations by Trump supporters on the date change were dismissed as unfounded by an attorney representing Jan. 6 defendants.

“So all you supposedly ‘In the know’ X-sters, just stop posting nonsensical conspiracy theories about why the Court — NOT JACK SMITH — removed the trial from the March 4 calendar,” attorney Bill Shipley wrote.

Trump has not celebrated the docket change, suggesting it was not seen as a victory. The appellate court is yet to rule on Trump’s immunity status, which could impact the trial timeline and other criminal cases he faces.

The upcoming Supreme Court hearing regarding former President Donald Trump’s claim of immunity from criminal prosecution has sparked significant attention and anticipation. Special counsel Jack Smith, prosecuting Trump on charges related to his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election, has urged the Supreme Court to reject Trump’s claim of immunity, emphasizing the critical constitutional principle that no person, including the president, is above the law.

In a filing to the Supreme Court, Smith and his team of prosecutors argued that Trump’s claim of “novel and sweeping immunity” from criminal laws contradicts the core constitutional provisions that safeguard democracy.

They emphasized that the former president’s alleged actions to thwart the transfer of presidential power were outside the duties of his office and do not entitle him to immunity from federal prosecution.

Smith’s filing outlined the layered safeguards in place for criminal cases, ensuring rigorous standards in prosecutions and rejecting any general presidential immunity from federal criminal statutes. The filing also highlighted the absence of evidence indicating Congress’s intention to exempt the president from federal criminal statutes.

The case marks the first time the Supreme Court will consider whether a former president is immune from criminal liability for alleged illegal acts committed while in office. The court’s decision in this case could have far-reaching implications for Trump’s other prosecutions, including those in New York and South Florida.

The justices will weigh the question of whether and to what extent a former president enjoys immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office. The phrasing of the question indicates that the court may not consider Trump’s argument that a former president can only be prosecuted if impeached by the House and acquitted by the Senate.

The severity, range, and democracy-damaging nature of the alleged crimes have been underscored, with Smith emphasizing the unique nature of Trump’s alleged conduct in American history.

The special counsel has warned that granting Trump immunity from criminal liability for efforts to overturn his electoral defeat “contravenes bedrock constitutional principles and threatens democracy itself.”

You May Also Like