Insiders Advisor
  • Stocks
  • World News
  • Business
  • Politics
  • Stocks
  • World News
  • Business
  • Politics

Insiders Advisor

Politics

Legal experts say Jack Smith’s runway to try Trump before 2024 election ‘just got a lot shorter’

by March 1, 2024
March 1, 2024
Legal experts say Jack Smith’s runway to try Trump before 2024 election ‘just got a lot shorter’

The Supreme Court on Wednesday granted review of former president Trump’s claims of presidential immunity in the election interference case brought by special counsel Jack Smith, which throws into question at least the timeline for a possible trial in an election in which Trump is the likely GOP nominee. 

While some legal experts question the likelihood of success in Trump’s arguments, they say that the high court’s review sets back Smith’s timeline to start a trial before an election and begs the question whether Attorney General Merrick Garland would — or should — approve going to trial just before the general election in November. 

Jonathan Turley, a practicing criminal defense attorney and professor at George Washington University, says ‘the runway for Jack Smith just got a lot shorter.’

‘I think that most people still believe that Smith can prevail before the Supreme Court. But the most immediate impact is that the runway for Jack Smith just got a lot shorter,’ Turley said in an interview with Fox News Digital. 

Smith’s ‘primary fight for the last few months has been to secure a trial before the election,’ Turley said, adding that if the trial is after the election, ‘there might not be a trial.’ 

Turley said that, should a decision come down from the Supreme Court as late as June, between a ‘host’ of pre-trial motions and other procedural elements at the district court level — even if the district court were as ‘motivated’ as Smith to get a trial scheduled before the election — the earliest a trial could start is the fall.

Turley noted the Department of Justice has a longstanding practice of avoiding any prosecutorial action that could be perceived as political within a certain time frame before the election. 

A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment. 

The Justice Manual states, ‘Federal prosecutors and agents may never select the timing of any action, including investigative steps, criminal charges, or statements, for the purpose of affecting any election, or for the purpose of giving an advantage or disadvantage to any candidate or political party.

‘Such a purpose is inconsistent with the Department’s mission and with the Principles of Federal Prosecution.’ 

While the DOJ can make timing requests of the court, it’s ultimately up to a judge to set the court’s calendar. 

‘The attorney general has a responsibility to maintain consistent application of departmental policy. This has nothing to do with the merits. Merrick Garland has been hands-off, has granted Smith almost total discretion as to the prosecution of the case. The timing of the case raises questions that remain within the attorney general’s purview, in my view,’ Turley said. 

John Shu, a constitutional law expert who served in both the George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush administrations, said all the Biden campaign and the Democrats need is for one of Trump’s trials to start before the general election. 

‘If that happens, the news coverage will be ‘all Trump trial all the time,’ especially if it’s televised, and no one is going to be talking about the economy, illegal immigration, wars in Israel and Ukraine, Biden’s disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan or super-high crime, gas prices, food prices and inflation,’ Shu said. ‘It’ll be worse than the O.J. Simpson trial.

‘The way Jack Smith has been acting, it indicates that he has been keeping his eye on the electoral calendar.’ 

‘This is all the more reason for the DOJ, in keeping with long-standing department policy in administrations from both parties, to delay trial if the date falls within two or three months before the presidential election,’ Shu added.

On the merits of the case before the nine justices, Turley said, ‘Trump will have a difficult time securing a majority in favor of the totality of his argument that Trump has offered a sweeping claim of immunity and is likely to produce a level of sticker shock for the justices.’

But, Turley said, ‘the justices may have a similar reaction to the lower court’s opinion that some justices may be uncomfortable with — the lack of a clear line of when immunity will protect a president.’ 

‘The interesting aspect of this is that many of us expected that many of the justices would have wanted this cup to pass from their lips. If they had simply denied review, they would not establish any precedent on presidential immunity,’ Turley said. 

‘The court has not been keen on delineating the lines of presidential immunity. The opinions that they have issued have had a certain room at the elbows in terms of the use of this protection.

‘So, this will force the court to set down some precedent. It’s very likely that some of the justices would like to see greater acknowledgment of immunity for the president, for a future president.’

Jim Trusty, former legal counsel for Trump and a former federal prosecutor, said ‘the Trump team argument that he has absolute unqualified immunity while he’s in office is not a winner.’

‘But I do think that there’s a strong possibility that the court confirms that immunity protects the president, acting even in the furthest reaches of his responsibilities. That could well be enough to win the day on both Jan. 6 and Mar-a-Lago classified documents cases,’ Trusty said.

The Justice Department declined to comment. 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
previous post
House punts government shutdown deadline to next week after Johnson forced to seek Dem support again
next post
Top House Republican prepares ‘fail safe’ option in case GOP can’t reach agreement on Ukraine aid

Related Posts

DAVID MARCUS: Some Democrats are giving Trump a...

November 14, 2024

China frees US pastor after nearly 20 years...

September 16, 2024

FBI director nominee Kash Patel broke hostage rescue...

January 28, 2025

Bush stays silent on how he will vote...

September 8, 2024

DOGE slashes nearly $1M for alpaca farming in...

March 5, 2025

Vance claims ‘Democrats are helping China’ in pitch...

August 27, 2024

Fetterman cites own ‘difficult’ debate in arguing Biden...

July 1, 2024

Trump issues ‘last warning’ to Hamas terrorists, demands...

March 6, 2025

President Trump slams Rosie O’Donnell after she flees...

March 13, 2025

Charity leaders slam Biden admin’s response to US...

November 18, 2024

    Fill Out & Get More Relevant News


    Stay ahead of the market and unlock exclusive trading insights & timely news. We value your privacy - your information is secure, and you can unsubscribe anytime. Gain an edge with hand-picked trading opportunities, stay informed with market-moving updates, and learn from expert tips & strategies.

    Latest News

    • Israel releases conversations with Gaza residents amid criticisms of aid delivery system

      July 1, 2025
    • Iran, following Trump strikes, says ‘the doors of diplomacy will never slam shut’

      July 1, 2025
    • Elon Musk’s attacks on Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ have ‘no basis,’ says No 2 House Republican

      July 1, 2025
    • Trump says DOGE ‘monster’ may have to ‘eat Elon’ as Musk vows primary ads for lawmakers who cross him on BBB

      July 1, 2025
    • Senate parliamentarian OKs ban on Planned Parenthood federal funding in Trump megabill

      July 1, 2025
    • 4 Senate amendments to Trump megabill that failed — and 1 that passed

      July 1, 2025

    Categories

    • Business (1,288)
    • Politics (6,227)
    • Stocks (904)
    • World News (460)
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Disclaimer: insidersadvisor.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2024 insidersadvisor.com | All Rights Reserved