District 24 lawmakers have mixed reactions to Education Savings Account recommendation in proposed FY2026 state budgetRounds Urges Ag Secretary to Avoid Reopening U.S.-Mexico Cattle Trade Due to Detected DiseaseFarm-to-School Program Applications Now OpenSDSU Extension 2025 Crop Hour webinar series starts in January2023 Irrigation and Water Management data now availableNearly half of US teens are online 'constantly,' Pew report findsRefunds on the way for Fortnite gamers charged for unwanted itemsStanley County High School students participate in State Oral Interp FestivalThe 125th playing of the Army vs. Navy game takes place todayDRG Saturday Sports Broadcast ScheduleSully Buttes edges out North Central in a tight finishGovs girls fall to Raiders in first game of the seasonGovs impress in season opening winFollow along with all SD high school basketball scores from around the statePro Football Hall of Famer and former Viking Randy Moss reveals cancer diagnosis, 6-hour surgeryCourt ruling says genetically engineered crops must have oversightFinal 2023-24 sunflower export figures releasedThune vows to speed up pace of bills going through the SenateIn a first, Arizona Attorney General Sues a Farm Over Water UseNCBA unimpressed with 2025 dietary guidelines report
×

Special counsel moves to dismiss election interference and classified documents cases against Trump

By Jody Heemstra Jul 15, 2024 | 3:15 PM

NOVEMBER 25, 2024:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal prosecutors moved Monday (Nov. 25, 2024) to dismiss the criminal charges against President-elect Donald Trump that accused him of plotting to overturn the 2020 election and to abandon the classified documents case against him, citing longstanding Justice Department policy that says sitting presidents cannot face criminal prosecution.

The decision by special counsel Jack Smith, who had fiercely sought to hold Trump criminally accountable for his efforts to subvert the 2020 election, represented the end of the federal effort against the former president following his election victory this month despite the election-related cases and multiple other unrelated criminal charges against him and is headed back to the White House.

The decision, revealed in court filings, also amounts to a predictable but nonetheless stunning conclusion to criminal cases that had been seen as the most perilous of the multiple legal threats Trump has faced. It reflects the practical consequences of Trump’s victory, ensuring he enters office free from scrutiny over his hoarding of top secret documents and his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election he lost to Democrat Joe Biden.

Smith’s team emphasized that the move to abandon the prosecutions, in federal courts in Washington and Florida, was not a reflection of their view on the merits of the cases but rather a reflection of their commitment to longstanding department policy.

“That prohibition is categorical and does not turn on the gravity of the crimes charged, the strength of the Government’s proof, or the merits of the prosecution, which the Government stands fully behind,” the prosecutors wrote in Monday’s court filing in the election interference case.

The decision was expected after Smith’s team began assessing how to wind down both the 2020 election interference case and the separate classified documents case in the wake of Trump’s victory over Vice President Kamala Harris. The Justice Department believes Trump can no longer be tried in accordance with longstanding policy that says sitting presidents cannot be prosecuted.

Trump has cast both cases as politically motivated, and had vowed to fire Smith as soon as he takes office in January.

The 2020 election case brought last year was once seen as one of the most serious legal threats facing the Republican as he vied to reclaim the White House. But it quickly stalled amid legal fighting over Trump’s sweeping claims of immunity from prosecution for acts he took while in the White House.

The U.S. Supreme Court in July ruled for the first time that former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution, and sent the case back to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to determine which allegations in the indictment, if any, could proceed to trial.

The case was just beginning to pick up steam again in the trial court in the weeks leading up to this year’s election. Smith’s team in October filed a lengthy brief laying out new evidence they planned to use against him at trial, accusing him of using “resorting to crimes” in an increasingly desperate effort to overturn the will of voters after he lost to Biden.

 

JULY 15, 2024:

WASHINGTON (AP) — The federal judge presiding over the classified documents case against ex-President Donald Trump in Florida has dismissed the prosecution. U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon on Monday sided with defense lawyers who said the special counsel who filed the charges against Trump was illegally appointed by the Justice Department. Special counsel Jack Smith’s team had vigorously contested Trump’s efforts to dismiss the case. The Republican former president says other cases against him also should be dismissed. Trump had been accused of illegally hoarding classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach and obstructing FBI efforts to get them back. The judge’s ruling can be appealed and may be overruled by a higher court.

 

APRIL 10, 2024:

WASHINGTON (AP) — The federal judge presiding over the classified documents case against former President Donald Trump has granted a request by prosecutors aimed at protecting the identities of potential government witnesses. But U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon refused Tuesday (April 9, 2024) to categorically block witness statements from being disclosed, saying there was no basis for such a “sweeping” and “blanket” restriction on their inclusion in pretrial motions. The 24-page order centers on a dispute between special counsel Jack Smith’s team and lawyers for Trump over how much information about witnesses and their statements could be made public ahead of trial.

 

MARCH 15, 2024:

FORT PIERCE, Fla. (AP) — A federal judge has rejected a bid by Donald Trump to throw out out his classified documents criminal case, and appeared skeptical during hours of arguments of a separate effort to scuttle the prosecution ahead of trial. U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon issued a two-page order Thursday (March 14, 2024) saying that though the Trump team had raised “various arguments warranting serious consideration,” a dismissal of charges was not merited. Cannon, who was nominated to the bench by Trump, is presiding over one of the four criminal cases against the 2024 presumptive Republican presidential nominee. This case involves records, some highly classified, he took with him from the White House.

 

FEBRUARY 23, 2024:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Former President Donald Trump urged a Florida judge to dismiss the criminal case charging him with illegally retaining classified documents, claiming in part that presidential immunity protects him from prosecution even as that sweeping argument has so far in failed in federal appeals courts in a separate case.

In one of a slew of motions attacking the case brought by special counsel Jack Smith, Trump’s lawyers late Thursday (Feb. 22, 2024) echoed arguments that were roundly rejected by a federal appeals court this month in his 2020 election interference case in Washington. Trump has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene in that case as the Republican presidential primary front-runner seeks to delay the trial until after the November election.

Trump’s lawyers wrote that the classified documents charges turn on his alleged decision to designate the papers as “personal” records under the Presidential Records Act, and argued that he cannot be prosecuted since that was an “official act” made while he was still in the White House.

Washington’s federal appeals court in its decision this month was unsparing in its repudiation of Trump’s novel claim that former presidents enjoy absolute immunity for actions that fall within their official job duties. But Trump’s lawyers argued that the appeals court’s decision was wrong, telling U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon she should not follow the court’s “poorly reasoned decision” in the classified documents case.

In other court filings late Thursday, Trump’s lawyers argued that Attorney General Merrick Garland’s appointment of special counsel Smith to investigate the former president was “unlawful” and grounds for dismissing the documents case. They also are attacking the law Trump is accused of violating as “unconstitutionally vague” as applied in his case.

The case accuses Trump of illegally hoarding classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate and obstructing government efforts to retrieve them. A June 2023 indictment charging him with dozens of felony counts alleges investigators found boxes of sensitive documents recklessly stored at Mar-a-Lago in spaces including a ballroom, a bathroom and shower, his bedroom and a storage room.

Prosecutors have said the documents he stowed, refused to return and in some cases showed to visitors risked jeopardizing not only relations with foreign nations but also the safety of troops and confidential sources. They’ve also accused Trump of asking a staffer to delete camera footage at his Florida estate in an effort to obstruct the federal investigation into his records.

The case is currently scheduled to go to trial in May, but Judge Cannon has pushed back multiple other deadlines and signaled an openness to revisiting the trial date during a pivotal pretrial conference set for March. It’s one of four criminal cases the former president is facing as he vies to reclaim the White House in November.

Smith’s other case against Trump, accusing him of scheming to overturn his 2020 election loss, was supposed to go to trial in March, but that date was canceled while the former president pushed his claims of presidential immunity. Trump’s lawyers have asked the Supreme Court to keep the case on hold while he continues to fight his presidential immunity claims.

The Supreme Court has previously held that presidents are immune from civil liability for official acts, and Trump’s lawyers have for months argued that that protection should be extended to criminal prosecution as well.

The justices’ decision on what to do and how quickly they act could determine whether the 2020 election case goes to trial before the November election. It carries enormous political ramifications, as Trump — if he wins — could potentially use his authority as head of the executive branch to try to order a new attorney general to dismiss the federal cases. Or he potentially could seek a pardon for himself — something that’s a legally untested proposition.

Comments

Leave a Reply

Current Weather

Chamberlain, SD 57325, USA
27 °F Cloudy
Mobridge, SD 57601, USA
27 °F Cloudy
Pierre, SD 57501, USA
26 °F Cloudy
google-site-verification: google9919194f75dd62c5.html