Jack Smith seeks delay in Trump’s election interference case after Supreme Court immunity ruling derailed it

Sign up for the daily Inside Washington email for exclusive US coverage and analysis sent to your inbox

Get our free Inside Washington email

Please enter a valid email address

Please enter a valid email address

SIGN UP

I would like to be emailed about offers, events and updates from The Independent. Read our privacy policy

Special Counsel Jack Smith is seeking a three-week delay in Donald Trump’s election interference case to give prosecutors more time to propose next steps in light of the Supreme Court’s unprecedented ruling around presidential immunity.

Smith’s office indicted Trump in August 2023 over his allegedly “criminal scheme” to overturn President Joe Biden’s victory by installing slates of “fake electors” in states he lost, ordering the Justice Department to conduct “sham election crime investigations” and pressuring then-vice president Mike Pence to “alter the election results,” then failing to stop a mob that sought to do it be force.

The Republican presidential nominee pleaded not guilty to all charges.

The case was frozen in District Judge Tanya Chutkan‘s courtroom since February, pending a ruling from the Supreme Court on the former president’s argument that he had “immunity” from prosecution over acts carried out while in office.

On July 1, the conservative-leaning court handed down its ruling, granting Trump and future presidents “absolutel” immunity for “official” acts — but not “unofficial” acts — in office.

The case was returned to Chutkan’s court after the ruling, and she quickly got to work to dismiss Trump’s other attempts to toss out the charges and asked both sides to submit proposals on how to move forward.

But in a joint status filing on Thursday, Smith’s office sought a further delay to the case, saying his office is continuing “to assess the new precedent set forth last month” in tandem with “other Department of Justice components”.

The filing continued: “Although those consultations are well underway, the government has not finalized its position on the most appropriate schedule for the parties to brief issues related to the decision.

“The government therefore respectfully requests additional time to provide the court with an informed proposal regarding the schedule for pretrial proceedings moving forward.”

Trump’s legal team – which has sought to delay proceedings from the geet-go – did not object to the proposeed delay.

On Friday, Judge Chutkan agreed to make the changes.

A joint status report that was due on August 9 is now due on August 30.

The status conference previously scheduled for August 16 was moved to September 5.

A “mini-trial” in Judge Chutkan’s court will review the scope of the Supreme Court ruling to determine, among other things, whether the “stolen election” narrative that fueled the attack on the Capitol on January 6 was under Trump’s “official” duties or were a personal crusade outside the remit of the presidency.

Smith’s request for a delay appears to suggest his team is finding that a difficult distinction to make, chiming with the exasperation expressed by many legal experts over the Supreme Court’s ambiguous verdict when it was first announced.

Observing that it was no surprise that Trump was happy to see the matter further postponed, MSNBC legal correspondent Lisa Rubin wondered on X whether Smith’s side really needed more time to “consult” on its proposals or whether the request for a delay was “revelatory of internal disputes about the best way — or any way — forward”.

Fellow pundit Andrew Wiessmann commented that the new motion “reeks of tension” between Smith and Attorney General Merrick Garland, whom he characterized as “wanting to move fast” and “very careful and cautious” respectively.