Special prosecutor Jack Smith has asked the judge overseeing Donald Trump’s Jan. 6 criminal case to halt further proceedings after his stunning election night victory.
He is asking for a one-month delay for his team to “evaluate this unprecedented circumstance and determine the appropriate course forward consistent with Department of Justice policy.”
The decision to halt the case comes after Smith and his team attempted to maintain a relentless case in previous filings throughout the year, and reflects the surprising new realities of the case.
Smith is referencing the Justice Department’s existing policy that no sitting president can be prosecuted. Although Trump remains president-elect, the January 6 case would extend well into his presidency.
Trump is expected to be formally certified as president-elect on January 6, 2025, and be sworn in on January 20.
He was indicted in the explosive August 2023 case on felony charges of attempting to overturn the election in the run-up to Jan. 6.
The two federal criminal cases against Donald Trump are likely to conclude before he reaches the White House, according to reports hours after his landslide election victory over Kamala Harris.
Legal experts also predict that the classified documents case against Trump (he is accused of taking national security documents to Mar-a-Lago after leaving the White House and obstructing justice) will also end.
Trump-appointed Judge Aileen Cannon has already dismissed the case and prosecutors are appealing it to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.
It’s a huge blow for Smith, who ramped up the cases in the final months of the campaign and has spent nearly three years and more than $35 million in taxpayer funds trying to put the 78-year-old former president on trial.
Trump has publicly criticized the career prosecutor, calling him “deranged” and saying he should be expelled from the country.
House Republicans, who have a good chance of maintaining a slim majority in the chamber, are stepping up their investigation of the House Jan. 6 committee that operated under Democratic control.
House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan and Republican Rep. Barry Loudermilk wrote to Smith telling him to preserve records related to his investigation.
Trump still faces sentencing in the hush money trial in New York next month and the election interference case in Georgia led by District Attorney Fani Wills has been plagued by a host of problems.
But those cases, two, could easily fall apart now that Trump has become the first president elected after being convicted of a crime: for 34 counts of falsifying financial documents in the Stormy Daniels trial.
Judge Juan Merchán must now decide whether to give in to the “immunity” arguments raised by Trump’s defense in light of a Supreme Court ruling, and what to do at the sentencing, currently scheduled for November 26.
Trump faces four charges in federal court in Washington, DC, accusing him of spreading false claims of voter fraud to try to block the collection and certification of votes following the 2020 election, which Trump lost to Democrat Joe Biden.
He asked federal courts to grant him presidential immunity, delaying the D.C. case for months, although the federal judge overseeing the case is still deciding to what extent Trump is actually covered by presidential immunity for his efforts to overturn his defeat. 2020 election.
Smith filed a new superseding indictment following the conservative majority’s 6-3 decision.
Since Trump will only be sworn into office on Inauguration Day, Jan. 20, prosecutors technically still have weeks to prosecute him if they wish.
But like previous efforts, they would be vulnerable to challenges and appeals.
‘The ball is in the court of the Department of Justice. “I think in the next 48 to 72 hours we’re going to hear something,” said a source close to Trump’s defense. “The Justice Department doesn’t want to be caught in a situation where they’re litigating something that doesn’t make sense.”
Smith had also accused Trump of illegally retaining classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida after his first term ended in 2021 and of obstructing the US government’s efforts to recover the records.
Florida-based U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, Trump’s nominee to the position, dismissed all charges in July after determining that Smith was improperly appointed to the position and did not have the authority to bring the case.
The ruling abruptly ended the case, ensuring that there would be no trial before the presidential election.
Smith’s team is appealing the ruling, but Trump’s promise to fire Smith “within two seconds” of taking office likely signals the end of the case.
Former President Donald Trump faced 88 criminal charges at the beginning of the year
But even if it were extended to the time Trump took office, it could shut him down.
Now that Republicans have taken control of the Senate, Trump is not expected to have difficulty confirming his Cabinet officials, and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) has already signaled his mandate and said he deserves to bring in his own town.
The Justice Department’s actions come after a year of extraordinary legal developments, sparked in part by the Justice Department’s decision to take its time before filing charges.
Smith then launched a frantic effort to advance the cases on multiple fronts as election deadlines approached.
Trump took political advantage of the multiple prosecutions, arguing that he was a victim of “legal warfare” and “lunatic” prosecutors.
A key factor in the situation is a decades-old memo from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel.
“The Department concluded that impeachment or criminal prosecution of a sitting president would impermissibly undermine the ability of the executive branch to perform its duties under the Constitution,” he said.
It does not mention the presidential transition period, although Trump’s team maintains that the Presidential Transition Act lists presidential authorities that would provide the same protections.
Further strengthening Trump’s position is the Supreme Court’s decision in the Jan. 6 case that established presidential “immunity” from prosecution while in office, while lower courts are still analyzing what conduct is protected and what is not.
