WASHINGTON — Donald Trump's 2020 election interference case in Washington once seemed likely to be the first criminal trial against the former president to begin, with the judge setting a March 4 start date. But calls on issues at the heart of the case threaten to change that.
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan put the case on hold Wednesday as Trump continues his claim in higher courts that he is immune from prosecution. Chutkan raised the possibility of keeping the March date if the case returns to her court quickly, but it is possible the appeal could tie up the case for months.
Potentially further complicating prosecutors' efforts to get to trial quickly is the Supreme Court's review of an obstruction charge used against Trump and hundreds of his supporters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Trump's lawyers have made clear that their legal strategy is to push for his trial to be postponed until after the 2024 election and they could use the Supreme Court's involvement to try to delay the case further. Trump is the current frontrunner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination.
A look at the legal issues complicating the trial date and the potential political fallout:
Trump, like more than 300 people accused of participating in the Capitol riot, is charged with obstructing an official proceeding, which refers to the joint session of Congress held on January 6 to appoint Democrat Joe Biden to recognize the winner of the presidential election. The Supreme Court said Wednesday it would consider a case against the use of the obstruction charge against a former police officer who joined the mob at the Capitol.
Trump's lawyers could try to make the argument that Trump's case cannot move forward until the Supreme Court rules on the scope of the obstruction offense, which could potentially impact both the obstruction charge and a related related conspiracy charges against Trump. His team would have to convince the court judge to agree to the pause.
At least two other Jan. 6 defendants convicted of obstruction have asked that sentencing hearings scheduled for next week be canceled and postponed until after the Supreme Court rules on the matter. Under the Supreme Court's normal schedule, the justices would not hear arguments on the case until late March or April.
David Alan Sklansky, a former federal prosecutor, said he doesn't think Trump has a good argument for delaying the case while judges review the obstruction charge. Sklansky, now a professor at Stanford Law School, noted that cases are constantly moving forward, even if they involve laws that are challenged in other cases.
“If the Supreme Court ultimately decides to narrowly interpret the statute at issue in that case, it could impact whether convictions under that statute in Trump would be upheld on appeal, Sklansky said. But he said: “It would be unusual to postpone a trial pending a Supreme Court ruling on such a legal issue.”
Immunity.
It is a word and a legal concept that will dominate the discussion in the courts in the coming weeks. And it could slow down the process.
In addition to taking up the obstruction statute, the Supreme Court is also being asked to consider a question that has an even more direct impact on the Trump case. It's one that has never been tested before the judges: Is a former president immune from federal prosecution?
Chutkan rejected the Trump team's arguments that an ex-president could not be prosecuted for actions within the official duties of his office.
After Trump's lawyers appealed, special counsel Jack Smith's team sought a quick, once-and-for-all resolution, asking the Supreme Court this week to not only consider that question, but also to quickly to make a decision so that the case can continue in the current manner. scheme.
The Supreme Court has said it will decide soon whether or not to hear the case. In the meantime, Smith's team also asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to expedite its own decision on presidential immunity.
That appeals court agreed late Wednesday to expedite the case, setting deadlines for filing the briefs between Dec. 23 and Jan. 2. But the appeals court has not yet set a date for when it will hear arguments.
It is possible.
The other criminal case brought by Smith accuses Trump of illegally hoarding classified documents at his Florida estate and obstructing the FBI's efforts to recover them. The trial is currently scheduled for May 20. But the judge in that case has set several other deadlines and indicated he is willing to reconsider the trial date at a crucial pre-trial conference scheduled for March.
A separate case alleging that Trump falsified business records in connection with hush money payments to a porn actress will be tried in New York state court on March 25, but that date has also not yet been set. Judge Juan Manuel Merchan said in September, in response to a request from the Trump team to delay that trial, that he would prefer to stick to the original schedule for now and wait until the next hearing in February to see if “there is any actual conflicts” that cause a delay.
No trial date has been set in Fulton County, Georgia, where the district attorney's office has accused Trump of trying to undermine that state's 2020 election. Prosecutors have asked for an August trial date, but his lawyer has said that would amount to an “election.” interference” and then organize a trial.
The dates of the trial have enormous political consequences.
If Trump were the Republican nominee and won the election in November, for example, he could presumably use his authority as head of the executive branch to try to order a new attorney general to dismiss the federal cases, or he could possibly pardon themselves – something that is a legally untested proposition.
Smith's team wants to secure convictions and sentences before the election in the coming year. As a private citizen, rather than an officeholder, Trump possesses no more power or privilege than anyone under the law. In a recent filing in the election subversion case, Smith's team said that “the public has a strong interest in seeing this case come to trial in a timely manner.”
Trump's team has accused Smith of trying to expedite the case for political reasons. Trump's lawyers told an appeals court this week that “the prosecution in this case has one goal: to unlawfully attempt to try, convict and convict President Trump before the election in which he is likely to defeat President Biden.”
____
Richer reported from Boston.