Jack Smith Moves to Crush Two Federal Cases Against Trump – Shocking Twist in Legal Battle

The special counsel effectively ended the Justice Department’s attempts to hold Donald J. Trump accountable in cases related to the election and classified documents.

By Sheenu Gupta On Nov 26, 2024 Share with new partner:

Special Counsel Jack Smith requested on Monday that two federal courts dismiss the criminal cases he filed last year against President-elect Donald J. Trump. This decision aligns with a Justice Department policy that deems it unconstitutional to prosecute sitting presidents.

Smith’s requests, submitted to judges in Washington and Atlanta, effectively acknowledge that when Mr. Trump returns to the White House in January, he will do so without facing federal charges related to accusations of attempting to overturn the 2020 presidential election and retaining highly classified documents after his first term.

The dual filings from Special Counsel Jack Smith signaled the winding down of years of intense investigations and legal battles that challenged the justice system’s ability to hold a former and future president accountable in the face of political shifts, misinformation, and evolving legal standards.

Shortly after Smith’s requests were filed, Judge Tanya S. Chutkan, presiding over the election interference case in Washington, issued an order dismissing the charges. Smith’s actions came as President-elect Donald J. Trump began selecting his Justice Department leadership, following campaign promises to fire Smith immediately upon taking office and to investigate the prosecutors and others he viewed as political enemies. Smith has indicated that he plans to resign before Trump’s inauguration.

In his court filings, Smith emphasized that the dismissal of charges was mandated by legal norms, not due to weaknesses in the cases or evidence. He cited a Justice Department policy barring the prosecution of sitting presidents, describing it as “categorical” and unaffected by the severity of the charges or the strength of the government’s case, which he stood by fully.

Smith acknowledged the unprecedented nature of the situation, noting that this was the first time in U.S. history where a federal indictment against a private citizen was already in progress when the individual was elected president.

Meanwhile, Trump’s political influence continued to grow despite multiple indictments, including those brought by local prosecutors in New York and Georgia. On Monday, Trump’s allies framed Smith’s actions as a vindication of the former president.

Steven Cheung, a spokesperson for Donald J. Trump, called Special Counsel Jack Smith’s decision to seek dismissals of the cases “a major victory for the rule of law” and an essential step toward ending the “political weaponization of our justice system.”

While Smith moved to end the criminal cases before Trump’s inauguration, he left the door open for potential future prosecution. His filings requested dismissals “without prejudice,” allowing the charges to be refiled after Trump leaves office for a second time. However, the filings did not address whether the five-year statute of limitations for most federal offenses would make reopening the cases impossible. Some legal experts believe that the time Trump spends in the White House could pause the statute of limitations.

Trump remains a defendant in a separate case brought by the Fulton County, Georgia district attorney, accusing him of attempting to overturn his 2020 election loss in the state. That case is mired in legal disputes, leaving its future uncertain. Additionally, Trump faces sentencing in Manhattan on state charges of falsifying business records to conceal a sex scandal. That case has been delayed, with the prosecutor indicating a willingness to pause proceedings for four years while Trump is in office.

Smith’s six-page filing to Judge Tanya S. Chutkan in Washington effectively ended the Justice Department’s lengthy effort to hold Trump accountable for his attempts to retain power after losing the 2020 presidential election to Joseph R. Biden Jr.

The indictment in the election interference case accused Donald J. Trump of spreading false claims about widespread voter fraud, pressuring officials to act on those claims, and delivering a provocative speech on January 6, 2021, just before his supporters stormed the Capitol to prevent Congress from certifying Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s victory.

In a separate filing with the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit regarding the classified documents case, Special Counsel Jack Smith referenced the election interference case. His submission was concise but raised complexities. Smith indicated he intended to continue prosecuting Trump’s co-defendants, Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, who worked at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate and were accused of helping to obstruct the government’s efforts to recover classified materials. However, it remained unclear how the case against the two men could proceed without Trump, as much of the evidence centers on him.

Smith’s filing also omitted any mention of Trump regaining the power to issue federal pardons when he is inaugurated on January 20. It is widely expected that Trump would halt prosecutions against his employees.

The documents case was already in limbo. The 11th Circuit was reviewing a decision by Judge Aileen M. Cannon, a Trump appointee, who dismissed the charges on the grounds that Smith’s appointment as special counsel was unlawful. While Smith withdrew his appeal regarding Trump, effectively ending the case against him, prosecutors continued appealing the dismissal of charges against Nauta and De Oliveira. The Justice Department hopes to overturn Judge Cannon’s ruling to protect its authority to appoint special counsels and other high-ranking prosecutors.

Smith’s decision to drop the charges against Trump was unsurprising but came earlier than expected, just one week before a December deadline he had set for notifying the courts of his plans. This move highlights Smith’s urgency to conclude his investigations. The special counsel’s team is now focused on preparing a final report, which is unlikely to reveal new details beyond those already included in the indictments and filings.

The election interference case, even as it concludes, will likely have lasting implications. The charges detailed unprecedented behavior by a president, testing the boundaries of prosecutorial power, judicial authority, and executive privilege. This case also led to a landmark Supreme Court ruling granting Trump and future former presidents broad immunity from prosecution for actions tied to their official duties, a precedent that will shape presidential accountability for generations.

The Justice Department began investigating Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election soon after the January 6 Capitol attack, examining his ties to far-right groups, political organizers, and those involved in schemes to submit false slates of electors. Around the same time, prosecutors launched a separate inquiry into Trump’s refusal to return classified documents he removed from the White House to his Mar-a-Lago estate.

Smith was appointed to oversee both investigations in November 2022, following Trump’s announcement of his third presidential bid, to ensure an independent process. In mid-2023, Smith filed two indictments against Trump: one in Florida accusing him of violating the Espionage Act and obstructing justice, and another in Washington accusing him of orchestrating multiple plots to remain in power after losing the 2020 election.