In a court filing, prosecutors suggested their revisions would let them steer clear of the Supreme Court ruling. Donald Trump’s lawyers made clear they would continue broad attacks on the case.
Listen to this article · 5:07 min Learn more
- Share full article
President Donald J. Trump speaking at his rally outside the White House on Jan. 6, 2021. The election subversion case, in which former Mr. Trump stands accused of plotting to reverse his 2020 loss to Joseph R. Biden Jr., was put on hold for months.
Federal prosecutors and lawyers for former President Donald J. Trump filed dueling proposals on Friday night about how to move forward in the case accusing him of plotting to overturn the 2020 election in light of the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling on presidential immunity and other legal issues.
The proposals gave starkly different views of the case: Prosecutors suggested they believed their revised charges would allow them to steer clear of the Supreme Court ruling, while Mr. Trump’s lawyers made clear they would continue attacks on the case that could push it far into next year.
In a joint filing to Judge Tanya S. Chutkan, prosecutors in the office of the special counsel, Jack Smith, said they wanted to begin the process of assessing the impact of the court’s immunity decision on the case simply by filing additional court papers.
The prosecutors told Judge Chutkan that they believe the immunity ruling “does not apply” to the revised charges they have brought against Mr. Trump and were prepared to submit a filing explaining their position “promptly at any time the court deems appropriate.”
Mr. Trump’s lawyers laid out a much broader vision of how they would like to proceed, saying their attacks on the case would go well beyond the issue of immunity.
Laying out a proposed schedule that reached into the fall of next year, the lawyers told Judge Chutkan that they planned to challenge the indictment on the grounds that Mr. Smith was improperly appointed to his job as special counsel. In July, a federal judge in Florida used that same rationale to dismiss the other case Mr. Smith brought against Mr. Trump — the one accusing him of illegally holding onto dozens of classified documents after he left office.
We are having trouble retrieving the article content.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access.
Already a subscriber? Log in.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
SKIP ADVERTISEMENT
Source: nytimes.com
