Judge agrees with special counsel about what to do next in Trump’s 2020 election case

Breaking News: Federal judge lays out schedule for next steps in Donald Trump’s case following Supreme Court ruling

After the recent Supreme Court ruling that former President Donald Trump enjoys immunity for “official acts” taken while in office, the federal judge overseeing his case regarding the aftermath of the 2020 election has set out a schedule for the prosecution’s next steps.

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan issued an order aligning mostly with the timeline proposed by special counsel Jack Smith, shortly after both sides met in court earlier on Thursday. Trump is facing four counts related to his alleged attempts to overturn the election results, including conspiracy to defraud the U.S.

Although Trump pleaded not guilty to the charges once again, he waived his appearance in court on Thursday.

Chutkan’s order rejects the timeline put forth by Trump’s legal team, which would have extended pretrial proceedings into 2025, well past the upcoming presidential election in November. Smith and his team had advocated for discussions regarding immunity to coincide with motions and other issues likely to be raised by Trump’s legal team.

The judge has ordered federal prosecutors to provide all necessary evidence to Trump’s team by Sept. 10. Smith’s team will then have until Sept. 26 to submit an opening brief outlining their arguments on presidential immunity. During the court session on Thursday, Smith’s prosecutors indicated that the immunity filing would contain new information not present in the initial indictment. Chutkan’s order sets the stage for this new material to become public before the election.

Chutkan has set an Oct. 17 deadline for Trump’s legal team to respond to the special counsel’s arguments and present their own request to dismiss the indictment based on immunity grounds. The government will then have until Oct. 29 to file a reply.

In a two-page order, Chutkan stated that once the immunity filings are submitted, she will determine if further proceedings are necessary. Additionally, Trump’s team must submit a filing by Sept. 19 containing “specific evidence related to presidential immunity” that they believe prosecutors withheld improperly.

The order also stipulates that Trump has until Oct. 24 to request permission from the court to file a motion to dismiss the case on the grounds that Smith’s appointment and funding are unconstitutional. The special counsel and his team will then have until Oct. 31 to file opposing papers.

The case has resumed following the Supreme Court’s ruling granting presidents absolute immunity from prosecution for official acts within their core constitutional powers. The court returned the case to Chutkan for further proceedings. At the hearing on Thursday, Trump’s lawyers and Smith’s prosecutors debated the timeline and how the Supreme Court’s ruling should be applied to Trump’s alleged actions. Last week, Smith’s team revised the indictment against Trump to comply with the immunity ruling.

During the hearing, Chutkan and Trump’s lawyer, John Lauro, disagreed about certain conduct in the new indictment, particularly Trump’s discussions with Vice President Mike Pence after the 2020 election. Lauro contended that the case should be dismissed even with the reduced accusations, as Trump’s conversations with Pence should be deemed official acts and thus immune from prosecution.

Chutkan noted that these conversations might be subject to presumptive immunity, which can be refuted by federal prosecutors. She will decide whether Trump and Pence’s interactions fall outside of the former president’s official duties. The judge emphasized that the upcoming election will not influence any decisions regarding the case’s progression, asserting that the court is not concerned with the electoral schedule.

Warnings from Trump’s lawyer regarding the weighty nature of the issues before the court were met with criticism from Chutkan, who dismissed any attempt to influence the case’s evidence presentation to avoid impacting the election.

Chutkan’s order and the hearing confirmed that a trial will not take place before the upcoming election, as any decisions she makes applying the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling will likely be appealed, resulting in further delays in the proceedings.

The judge deemed discussing a trial date at this point as futile, emphasizing that any decisions will be subject to appeal, leading to additional pauses in the legal proceedings.