Left: Violent insurrectionists loyal to President Donald Trump breach the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Jan. 6, 2021 (AP Photo/John Minchillo). Top right: U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan (Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts via AP). Bottom right: Former President of the United States Donald J. Trump delivers remarks at the Republican Party of Florida’s Freedom Summit in Kissimmee (Kyle Mazza / SOPA Images/Sipa USA via AP Images).
One month after the U.S. Supreme Court’s presidential immunity ruling seemingly threw a grenade on special counsel Jack Smith’s prosecution of Donald Trump for allegedly criminally conspiring to subvert the results of the 2020 election and intimidate voters, the case has now formally returned to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan following a seven-month stay.
The case had languished on appeal as Trump’s legal team advanced its immunity argument, with considerable success, to the Supreme Court.
“In light of the Supreme Court’s judgment filed Aug. 2, 2024, vacating the court’s February 6, 2024 judgment, and remanding for further proceedings consistent with the Court’s opinion in Trump v. United States… it is ordered, on the court’s own motion, that this case be remanded to the District Court for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court’s opinion,” the 1-page per curiam order states.
Now Judge Chutkan, appointed to the bench by former President Barack Obama, will need to decide how to proceed and, specifically, how the year-old indictment against Trump stacks up.
The Supreme Court’s immunity ruling found that a president can only be prosecuted for official acts central to their constitutional authority while private conduct is still eligible for prosecution. The 6-3 ruling also said there could be some exceptions in this specific context but it would be for lower courts to decide.
There is a zero chance the matter will go to trial before the 2024 presidential election but if pretrial hearings were any indicator, Chutkan will not endeavor to move slowly.
After the indictment was filed last August and Trump entered his not guilty plea, Chutkan indicated she was inclined to keep the process streamlined. As days turned into weeks, Trump’s attorneys dug in their heels and, as Law&Crime reported, often argued they were overwhelmed with pretrial discovery, issues with classified materials, obtaining security clearance to review those materials and more.
But Chutkan kept the tempo, encouraging all parties to prepare for a March 2024 trial so the matter might be long resolved before voters went to the polls in November. The trial date was ultimately vacated in February.
With the case back in her court, a series of hearings are expected to be scheduled. Those hearings would give Chutkan a chance to weigh arguments from prosecutors and defense attorneys about what evidence they could present. A large portion of the allegations lodged against Trump in the Jan. 6 election subversion case hinge on the claim that he conspired with Justice Department attorney Jeffrey Clark to forward bogus voter fraud claims and weaponize the department against any who might stand in their way.
As Law&Crime reported in July, Chief Justice John Roberts penned one particular sentence in the immunity ruling that seemed to deal a death blow, or at least, a massively destructive one, to most key elements in the criminal indictment.
“And the parties and the district court must ensure that sufficient allegations support the indictment’s charges without such conduct. Testimony or private records of the president or his advisers probing such conduct may not be admitted as evidence at trial,” Roberts wrote.
That will have an impact on evidence tied to Vice President Mike Pence as well as a bevy of White House aides and attorneys allegedly involved in the plot to upend the 2020 electoral certification.
Any hearings before Chutkan will likely be fraught with debate between the parties and considerable objection from Trump’s lawyers. As of Friday, there are just 94 days left until Election Day, and long before Trump was even nominated to lead his party in the presidential race, his attorneys balked that a trial before November 2024 would infringe on his time and resources.
While she acknowledged his predicament, Chutkan seemed mostly unimpressed by such logic. At a hearing following Smith’s request for a protective order for a small amount of classified discovery in the case and a gag order for Trump, Trump’s lawyers bristled at the idea of any limitations on the political candidate.
In August, Chutkan said the campaign would have to come second.
“Regardless of what is going on with his, I hate to say, his day job, this is a criminal case. The need for this to proceed in normal order and protect witnesses, integrity of process means there are going to be limits on [the] defendant’s speech,” she said.
Chutkan: But that has to yield. Regardless of what is going on with his, I hate to say, his day job, this is a criminal case. The need for this to proceed in normal order and protect witnesses, integrity of process means there are going to be limits on defendant’s speech
— Brandi Buchman (@Brandi_Buchman) August 11, 2023
A narrow gag order was eventually placed on Trump in the Jan. 6 case. It only barred him from attacking prosecutors, prospective witnesses and other trial participants. He could still criticize the charges or the Justice Department as a whole. He was also left eligible to attack the trial venue if he wished.
Prosecutors working on Smith’s team should be poised to restart the case without much delay since they have been preparing for months and as CNN reported Friday, unnamed familiar sources believe Chutkan may have already drafted opinions for motions left over from before the stay.
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
