The office of Special Counsel Jack Smith requested a delay on Thursday in responding to a scheduling order from the judge overseeing the federal election subversion case against former President Donald Trump. This request is due to issues arising from the Supreme Court’s recent decision that grants presidents immunity from prosecution for certain actions taken while in office.
Smith’s office mentioned in a joint status report filed Thursday evening that they are still assessing the implications of the Supreme Court’s new precedent alongside other Department of Justice components.
“While consultations are ongoing, the Government has not yet finalised its stance on the most suitable schedule for briefing issues related to the decision,” stated Smith’s office. They requested more time to offer the Court an informed proposal for the schedule of pretrial proceedings.
Special Counsel Jack Smith alleges the multistate scheme was designed to position VP Mike Pence to replace legitimate electors’ votes for Biden with fake elector votes for Trump and certify Trump as president. https://t.co/4ec2wh5djA pic.twitter.com/N66PoRgafs
— 60 Minutes (@60Minutes) February 19, 2024
The filing noted that Trump’s team did not object to the Special Counsel’s request for a three-week extension. This extension would also cancel a status conference set for the following Friday, allowing District Judge Tanya Chutkan to reschedule it at her convenience after the government’s filing.
This filing indicates that Special Counsel Smith’s office is still grappling with how to proceed with its Jan. 6 case against Trump following the Supreme Court’s decision. The ruling grants immunity for “official acts” taken by a president but not for “unofficial acts.”
Judge Chutkan resumed control of the case last Friday and had set a quick briefing schedule. However, Smith’s team has had over a month since the Supreme Court’s July 1 decision to deliberate on their next steps.
The delay request comes amid widespread frustration among legal experts over the ambiguity of the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling. They argue this could hinder any criminal prosecution of a president, even beyond Trump’s alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
Last year, Trump pleaded not guilty to charges related to a “criminal scheme” to overturn the 2020 election results. These charges include enlisting a slate of “fake electors,” using the Justice Department for “sham election crime investigations,” attempting to persuade the vice president to “alter the election results,” and promoting false claims of a stolen election during the Jan. 6 riot. Trump has denied all wrongdoing.