Special counsel Jack Smith on Monday asked the Supreme Court to weigh in on claims by former President Donald Trump’s lawyers that their client enjoys immunity from his federal prosecution in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot.
“This case presents a fundamental question at the heart of our democracy: whether a former president has absolutely immunity from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office or whether he is constitutionally protected from federal prosecution when he has been charged but not convicted before for the criminal process to begin. ” Smith wrote in an 81-page petition filed Monday with the high court.
He added that the request was “of imperative public importance” since the former president is scheduled to go on trial on March 4, 2024, and Trump’s lawyers have already appealed a district court ruling against blanket immunity.
Even with a “highly expedited” appeals process, Smith added, “it is unclear whether this Court would be able to hear and resolve the minimum immunity issues during its current term,” which ends about four months before the 2024 election.
Special counsel Jack Smith asked the Supreme Court to evaluate claims by former President Donald Trump’s lawyers that he has immunity from his Jan. 6 federal indictment, according to a filing Monday. AP
Smith’s petition asked for a response by Dec. 18, and a resolution to the constitutional issues raised within a few weeks should the justices take up the issue.
The court responded Monday night by giving the former president’s lawyers until 4 p.m. Dec. 20 to respond to Smith’s filing.
Trump’s lawyers had argued that the former president’s attempts to challenge his 2020 loss to former Vice President Joe Biden fell within the “outer perimeter” of his official responsibilities.
“This case presents a fundamental question at the heart of our democracy: whether a former president is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office,” Smith wrote in the petition to the high court. POOL/AFP via Getty Images
The special counsel also noted that “precedent supports expeditious action,” referencing the Supreme Court’s 1974 ruling in United States v. Nixon.
In that case, President Richard Nixon was denied executive privilege and forced to comply with a subpoena from a special prosecutor to obtain audio recordings critical to the Watergate investigation.
“As in the Nixon case, ‘the public importance of the issues presented and the need for their prompt resolution’ merit this Court’s intervention now, without waiting for the completion of the appellate proceedings,” Smith argued.
The special counsel also noted that “precedent supports expeditious action,” referencing the Supreme Court’s 1974 ruling in United States v. Nixon. AP
“And as in the Nixon case, that is true even though the district court correctly denied defendant’s presidential immunity claims and claims related to double jeopardy,” he added.
Double jeopardy claims asserted that Trump was immune from prosecution as he had been impeached in the House for incitement of insurrection on January 6, 2021, but was acquitted by the Senate.
Smith also noted that a separate Supreme Court ruling (Nixon v. Fitzgerald) grants presidents mere “civil immunity” while performing their official duties, but not an “absolute shield against criminal liability.”
The double jeopardy allegations alleged that Trump was immune from prosecution as he had been impeached in the House for his actions on January 6, 2021, but was acquitted by the Senate. AFP via Getty Images On December 1, US District Judge Tanya Chutkan denied Trump’s motion to dismiss the four-count indictment against her for attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 election in Washington, DC. US COURTS via REUTERS
“A cornerstone of our constitutional order is that no person is above the law,” he wrote. “The strength of that principle is at its zenith when, as here, a grand jury has indicted a former president for committing federal crimes to subvert the peaceful transfer of power to his legally elected successor.”
“Corrupt Joe Biden’s right-hand man, the deranged Jack Smith, is so obsessed with interfering in the 2024 presidential election, with the goal of preventing President Trump from retaking the Oval Office, as the president is willing to do, that “Smith is willing to attempt a Hail Mary by running to the Supreme Court and attempting to circumvent the Appeals Process,” a spokesperson for the former president said in a statement.
“’Deranged’ may need to be reminded that the Supreme Court has not been kind to him, even handing him a rare unanimous reprimand when the Court overruled him 8-0 in the case. [Bob] McDonnell case. As President Trump has said time and time again, this prosecution is entirely politically motivated. It’s an unprecedented attack on corrupt Joe Biden’s political opponent – Banana Republic style! There is absolutely no reason to rush this witch hunt to trial except to hurt President Trump and his 150 million, at least, supporters. “President Trump will continue to fight for justice and oppose these authoritarian tactics.”
On December 1, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan denied Trump’s motion to dismiss the four-count indictment against him for attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 election in Washington, D.C., which culminated in the storming of the Capitol. the United States by a mob of his supporters. .
Trump, 77, who has pleaded not guilty to all charges, is the favorite for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, leading the field by more than 47 percentage points, according to polling aggregator RealClearPolitics.
He is scheduled to go to trial in the Jan. 6 case on March 4, 2024, the day before Super Tuesday in the Republican primary.
Categories: Trending
Source: vtt.edu.vn