On Friday, the Supreme Court rejected special counsel Jack Smith's request to expedite the consideration of a crucial aspect in the so-called election interference case involving former President Donald Trump rather than have the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals review it first.
Last week, Smith urged the justices to address Trump's attempt to dismiss the election interference case directly on grounds of presidential immunity, skipping the preliminary review by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. However, in an unsigned order issued on Friday, the Supreme Court dismissed Smith's request.
Related: Does It Get Any More Desperate Than This for Joe Biden?
"The petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment is denied," the Supreme Court wrote.
Earlier this month, Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is overseeing the case, surprisingly acknowledged her lack of jurisdiction in the case and put it on hold as the court awaits a decision by the Supreme Court to take up the case. Smith wanted the Supreme Court to expedite the case in the hopes of maintaining the scheduled trial date of March 4.
Chutkan had previously denied Trump’s motion to dismiss the case.
Trump’s attorneys told the justices in a filing Wednesday that they should reject Smith’s request, which they alleged had a “partisan motivation,” and to not “rush to decide the issues with reckless abandon.”
“This Court’s ordinary review procedures will allow the D.C. Circuit to address this appeal in the first instance, thus granting this Court the benefit of an appellate court’s prior consideration of these historic topics and performing the traditional winnowing function that this Court has long preferred,” Trump’s lawyers wrote Wednesday.
His lawyers said Smith “confuses the public interest with a partisan interest of his superior, President Biden.”
“Further, the Special Counsel’s insistence that this Court decide the immunity question ‘during its current Term,’ reflects the evident desire to schedule President Trump’s potential trial during the summer of 2024— at the height of the election season,” they wrote.
Oral arguments at the D.C. Circuit are scheduled for Jan. 9, 2024. The question will likely come back to the Supreme Court after the appeals court issues a ruling.
While this is a victory for Trump, it’s a victory that may not make a huge difference because it may only delay the Supreme Court’s taking up the case by a few weeks. According to a report from The Messenger, "The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has its own expedited briefing schedule and Jan. 9 oral arguments on the calendar to tackle the same set of questions. Should Trump lose there he's expected to make his own push for review at the Supreme Court."
Assuming the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals does rule against Trump, it’s anyone’s guess how the Supreme Court will rule on the matter. Despite the Supreme Court’s 6-3 conservative majority, the court hasn’t always ruled in favor of Trump or conservatives.
Trump’s legal team has previously tried to get Chutkan, who is an Obama appointee, to recuse herself from the case due to her blatant anti-Trump bias. She has a history of making partisan comments about the Capitol riot. In October 2022, Chutkan falsely described the Capitol riot as “nothing less than an attempt to violently overthrow the government, the legally, lawfully, peacefully elected government by individuals who were mad that their guy lost.”
Jack Smith has also been called out for being a hardcore partisan whose sole purpose was to get the result the Biden administration wanted. Smith has been known for targeting Republicans with shoddy investigations, while his cases involving Democrats have resulted in mistrials.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member