Physical Address

304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124

Trump’s Attorneys Seek Election Case Dismissal, Say Special Council Appointment Unconstitutional

Former President Donald Trump’s attorneys argued in a new filing on Oct. 24 that Special Counsel Jack Smith’s superseding indictment should be dismissed since his appointment was unconstitutional.
“Everything that Smith did since Attorney General [Merrick] Garland’s appointment, as President Trump continued his leading campaign against President Biden and then Vice President Harris, was unlawful and unconstitutional,” Trump’s attorneys said in a filing to D.C. Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is overseeing his election interference case.
The filing was a motion requesting that Chutkan allow Trump to submit another motion to dismiss based on the legality of Smith’s appointment. Trump is seeking not only dismissal of the superseding indictment but also an injunction preventing Smith from “spending additional public funds” while violating the Constitution.
It’s the latest attempt by Trump to obtain rulings that would severely weaken or end Smith’s prosecution, which restarted after months of delay as the Supreme Court weighed Trump’s appeal on presidential immunity.
Trump is seeking to dismiss the case based on the Supreme Court’s ruling that presidents have some immunity, as well as based on its decision from June in Fischer v. United States, which narrowed Smith’s application of an obstruction statute used against Jan. 6 defendants.
Trump’s latest filing echoes arguments from Florida Judge Aileen Cannon, who dismissed Smith’s classified documents case against Trump in the state. Both Trump and Cannon also cited Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, whose concurring opinion in the immunity decision raised doubts about the legitimacy of Smith’s appointment.
Chutkan has already indicated that she would reject the type of arguments that Cannon used in dismissing the classified documents case. During a status conference on Sept. 5, she said that she didn’t find Cannon’s opinion “particularly persuasive.”

en_USEnglish