Special Counsel Jack Smith has filed his reply to former President Trump\u2019s team\u2019s response to his initial filing at the Supreme Court.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
Smith is pressing to expedite the consideration of Trump\u2019s immunity claims, hoping to keep the March trial date he set.\u00a0Trump\u2019s team opposes the fast track.<\/p>\n
This now means the Supreme Court has all the materials it requested and could make a decision on this at any time.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
A decision at this point would only be on whether the Court will expedite their ruling on this particular issue \u2013 not on the merits of the case at this stage.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u2018This case involves\u2014for the first time in our Nation\u2019s history\u2014criminal charges against a former President based on his actions while in office,\u2019 Smith wrote in the filing. \u2018And not just any actions: alleged acts to perpetuate himself in power by frustrating the constitutionally prescribed process for certifying the lawful winner of an election. The Nation has a compelling interest in a decision on respondent\u2019s claim of immunity from these charges\u2014and if they are to be tried, a resolution by conviction or acquittal, without undue delay.\u2019<\/p>\n
This comes after Trump\u2019s attorneys urged the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday to stand down from a dispute over whether he can be prosecuted on charges he plotted to overturn the 2020 election results. Smith\u2019s team last week urged the nation\u2019s high court to take up and quickly consider Trump\u2019s claims that he enjoys immunity from prosecution as a former president.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The unusual request for a speedy ruling seemed designed to prevent any delays that could postpone the trial of the 2024 Republican presidential primary front-runner until after the election. However, Trump\u2019s lawyers told the Supreme Court that there was no reason for them to take up the matter now, especially because a lower appeals court in Washington is already considering the same question and has scheduled arguments for Jan. 9.<\/p>\n
\u2018Importance does not automatically necessitate speed. If anything, the opposite is usually true. Novel, complex, sensitive, and historic issues \u2014 such as the existence of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts \u2014 call for more careful deliberation, not less,\u2019 Trump\u2019s lawyers wrote.<\/p>\n
It is far from certain that the Supreme Court will decide now to take up Trump\u2019s immunity claims in the election interference case, which were rejected by the trial court judge in a ruling that declared the office of the president \u2018does not confer a lifelong \u2018get-out-of-jail-free\u2019 pass.\u2019 Smith is asking the Supreme Court to bypass the federal appeals court in Washington, which has expedited its own review of the decision. So the Supreme Court may wait to get involved until after the appeals court judges hear the case.<\/p>\n
Separately, Trump\u2019s lawyers plan to ask the Supreme Court to overturn a decision in another case barring him from Colorado\u2019s ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which prohibits anyone who swore an oath to support the Constitution and then \u2018engaged in insurrection\u2019 against it from holding office.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The Colorado Supreme Court\u2019s 4-3 ruling is the first time in history the provision has been used to try to prohibit someone from running for the presidency.<\/p>\n
The Associated Press contributed to this report.<\/p>\n\n
Special Counsel Jack Smith has filed his reply to former President Trump\u2019s team\u2019s response to his initial filing at the Supreme Court.\u00a0\u00a0 Smith is pressing to expedite the consideration of Trump\u2019s immunity claims, hoping to keep the March trial date he set.\u00a0Trump\u2019s team opposes the fast track. This now means the Supreme Court has all <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":13173,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[25],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-13172","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-politics"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13172","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13172"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13172\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/13173"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13172"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13172"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13172"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}