The Supreme Court may hear an appeal on Donald Trump‘s election-fraud case this term, a former federal prosecutor has said.
Joyce Vance was reacting to the release of a 165-page evidence brief, which sets out the prosecutors’ case against Trump after the Supreme Court granted him broad immunity from prosecution.
Trump is accused of conspiracy to defraud the United States; conspiracy to obstruct a Congressional official proceeding; obstruction and attempting to obstruct an official proceeding; and conspiracy against rights in connection with an alleged pressure campaign on state officials to reverse the 2020 election results. Newsweek emailed the Trump campaign team for comment on Friday.
The Republican nominee has denied all charges against him and repeatedly said he is the victim of a political witch hunt. He has accused chief prosecutor Jack Smith of attempting to interfere in the 2024 presidential election by prosecuting him.
Writing in her Civil Discourse legal blog on Friday, Vance noted that prosecutors have included much of the evidence against the former president but have framed it as his personal rather than presidential conduct.
That, she believes, is going to lead to a second Supreme Court decision in the case, as the court will have to decide if the prosecution evidence is in line with its July 1 ruling on presidential immunity.
Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump speaks at a press conference in the Discovery Center on October 1, 2024 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. His election-fraud case may be appealed for a second time to the Supreme Court, a former prosecutor has said.
Jim Vondruska/Getty Images
Which side takes the Supreme Court appeal will depend on how trial judge Tanya Chutkan rules on the prosecution evidence, Vance added.
“Trump will be able to appeal her decisions about what isn’t protected by immunity, and the government can appeal any decisions she makes about what is.
“That could mean the Supreme Court adding the case to its docket for this term—if the Court of Appeals gets it to them that quickly—ordering briefing and oral argument, and not rendering a decision until as late as June or July,” Vance wrote.
She added that the case may first go to the federal court of appeals or the Supreme Court may take it directly.
“Look for the government to ask the Supreme Court to hear the case directly without waiting on the Court of Appeals,” Vance wrote. “The government made that motion last time and the Supreme Court waved it off, but at this point, there is really no rationale to let the Court of Appeals try to speculate about what the Supreme Court meant in its immunity decision in Trump.”
In late August, Smith filed an updated indictment of Trump, reshaping the case to comply with the Supreme Court‘s ruling granting immunity to sitting presidents when conducting certain “official” acts.
The new indictment removes all accusations leveled against Trump regarding attempts to pressure the Department of Justice (DOJ) to declare falsely that President Joe Biden‘s 2020 election win was the result of massive fraud.
Vance wrote that Wednesday’s court filing shows that Smith has still managed to keep in much of the evidence.
“Now we have a clear view of what Smith believes is still on the table after the Supreme Court’s decision. The short version: just about everything. Smith acknowledges that the Court took Trump’s interactions with DOJ officials out of the case, but he argues that everything else is either private conduct that is fair game or official conduct that he can overcome the presumption of immunity,” Vance added.
