Special counsel Jack Smith’s signature appears on a revised indictment in the 2020 election subversion case against Donald Trump after US prosecutors obtained the indictment in Washington, US, on August 27, 2024. Photo: US Department of Justice via REUTERS
Special Counsel Jack Smith filed a new indictment against Donald Trump on Tuesday (August 27, 2024) over his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. former presidents.
The new indictment drops part of the indictment that accused Mr. Trump of trying to use the Justice Department’s law enforcement powers to overturn his election loss, an area of conduct that the Supreme Court addressed in a 6-3 opinion last month , said Mr. Trump was absolutely immune from prosecution.
The stripped-down criminal case represents a first attempt by prosecutors to comply with a Supreme Court opinion that is likely to result in a significant review of charges against Mr. Trump over his efforts to block the peaceful transfer of power. It was filed three days before a deadline for prosecutors and defense attorneys to tell the judge in the case how they planned to proceed in light of that opinion, which said former presidents are presumptively immune from prosecution for official White House actions .
The two sides will be back in court next week for a status hearing, the first time in months as the case had been effectively frozen since December last year as Trump’s immunity claim worked its way through the legal system.
In a statement on his Truth Social platform, Mr. Trump called the new indictment “an act of desperation” and an “attempt to resurrect a ‘dead’ witch hunt.” He said the new case “all has problems from the old’. The charges must be dismissed IMMEDIATELY. ”
The special counsel’s office said the updated indictment, filed in federal court in Washington, was issued by a grand jury that had not previously heard evidence in the case. A statement said the indictment “reflects the government’s efforts to respect and implement the judgments and instructions of the Supreme Court.”
The central review in the updated criminal case concerns Mr. Trump’s dealings with the Justice Department.
The original indictment included allegations that Mr. Trump tried to enlist the department in his failed effort to overturn his election loss, including by conducting sham investigations and telling states — falsely — that significant fraud had been discovered.
It detailed how Jeffrey Clark, a top official in Trump’s Justice Department, sought to send a letter to elected officials in certain states, falsely claiming that the department had “identified significant concerns that may have affected the outcome of the elections’ and the top had asked department officials to sign it, but they refused.
Mr. Clark’s support for Mr. Trump’s election fraud claims led Mr. Trump to openly consider appointing him acting attorney general to replace Jeffrey Rosen, who led the department in the final weeks of the administration. Trump. Mr. Trump eventually gave in to that idea “when he was told it would lead to massive layoffs at the Department of Justice,” according to the original complaint. Mr. Rosen remained as acting attorney general until the end of Mr. Trump’s term
The new case no longer names Mr. Clark as a co-conspirator. Mr. Trump’s co-conspirators were not named in either indictment, but they have been identified through public records and other means.
In its opinion, the Supreme Court ruled that a president’s interactions with the Justice Department constitute official acts for which he is entitled to immunity, effectively removing these allegations from the case.
“As we have explained, the president’s power to remove ‘executive officers of the United States whom he has appointed’ may not be regulated by Congress or reviewed by the courts,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court.
The justices sent other core allegations in the case back to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, the judge presiding over the case, to determine what is an official act protected from prosecution — and what is not.
The new indictment still contains one of Mr. Smith’s most stunning allegations — that Mr. Trump participated in a scheme orchestrated by allies to recruit a series of fraudulent voters in battleground states won by Democrat Joe Biden, who would falsely testify that Mr. Trump had won in those states.
It also includes allegations that Mr. Trump tried to pressure Vice President Mike Pence to reject legitimate electoral votes, and that Mr. Trump and his allies exploited the chaos at the Capitol on Jan. 6 in an attempt to halt the certification of Mr Trump to further delay. Biden’s victory.
Mr. Roberts wrote in his majority opinion that the interactions between Mr. Trump and Mr. Pence amounted to official conduct for which “Trump is at least presumptively immune from prosecution.”
The question, Mr. Roberts wrote, is whether the government can rebut “that presumption of immunity.”
Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson disagreed with the ruling. In an excerpt from an interview with CBS News’ “Sunday Morning” that aired Tuesday, she said, “I was concerned about a system that seemed to provide immunity to one individual under one set of circumstances.” While we have a criminal justice system that has normally treated everyone the same.”
