Judge in Trump’s 2020 election case sides with special counsel on next steps after immunity ruling
Washington — The federal judge overseeing former President Donald Trump’s case over the aftermath of the 2020 election laid out the schedule for next steps in the prosecution following the Supreme Court’s ruling that Trump enjoys immunity for “official acts” he took while in the White House.
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan issued an order mostly siding with a timeline proposed by special counsel Jack Smith, hours after the two sides met in her courtroom earlier Thursday. Trump is charged with four counts related to his alleged efforts to overturn the election results, including conspiracy to defraud the U.S.
He pleaded not guilty to the charges again, but waived his appearance before the court Thursday.
Chutkan’s order
The judge’s order rejects the schedule set out by Trump’s lawyers that would have extended pretrial proceedings into the spring or fall of 2025 — well after the November presidential election.
Smith and his team had pushed for discussions about immunity to take place alongside motions and other issues that the former president’s legal team is expected to raise.
Chutkan ordered federal prosecutors to turn over to Trump’s team all required evidence by Sept. 10, and gave Smith’s team until Sept. 26 to submit an opening brief presenting their arguments on presidential immunity. Smith’s prosecutors said in court Thursday that the immunity filing would include new information that was not included in the indictment. Chutkan’s order paves the way for that material to become public before November’s election.
The judge set an Oct. 17 deadline for Trump’s team to respond to the special counsel’s arguments and submit their own request to dismiss the indictment on immunity grounds. The government will then have until Oct. 29 to file its reply.
Chutkan wrote in her two-page order that once the filings on the immunity issue are submitted, she will decide whether additional proceedings are needed.
The judge also said a filing from Trump’s team that must be submitted by Sept. 19 should include “any specific evidence related to presidential immunity” that the former president believes prosecutors improperly withheld.
The order also states Trump has until Oct. 24 to ask the court to allow him to submit a motion to dismiss the case on claims Smith’s appointment and funding is unconstitutional. The special counsel and his team have until Oct. 31 to file papers opposing this request.
Thursday’s hearing
The case is resuming months after the Supreme Court found that presidents are entitled to absolute immunity from prosecution for official acts that are part of their “core constitutional powers,” and the presumption of immunity for acts that are official but outside their “exclusive authority.” Private acts enjoy no immunity.
The high court sent the case back to Chutkan for further proceedings. The judge held a hearing with Trump’s attorneys and Smith’s prosecutors earlier Thursday where they argued over the timeline and how the Supreme Court’s ruling should be applied to Trump’s alleged conduct. Smith’s team revised the indictment against Trump last week to comply with the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling.
At the hearing, Chutkan and John Lauro, Trump’s lawyer, sparred over whether some of the conduct contained in the new indictment — namely the former president’s conversations with Vice President Mike Pence after the 2020 election — was covered by presidential immunity.
Lauro has argued that the case should be tossed out even with the slimmed-down accusations since Trump’s discussions with Pence should be considered official acts and therefore not subject to prosecution.
But Chutkan said those conversations may be subject to presumptive immunity, the lesser form of protection that can be rebutted by federal prosecutors. Whether Trump and Pence’s interactions are outside of the former president’s official duties will be for her to decide, the judge said.
She also made clear that the upcoming election would not factor into any decisions about how the case will proceed. Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, is seeking to defeat Vice President Kamala Harris in November to secure a second term in the White House.
“The electoral process … is not relevant here,” Chutkan told Lauro. “This court is not concerned with the electoral schedule.”
Repeated warnings from Trump’s lawyer about the “weighty” and “grave” issues before the court earned him condemnation from Chutkan.
“It strikes me that what you’re trying to do is affect the presentation of evidence in this case so as not to impinge on an election,” she said. “I am not considering it.”
The hearing, and Chutkan’s order, reaffirmed that a trial in the case will not take place before the November election. Chutkan said any decisions she makes when applying the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling will be appealed, leading to another pause in the proceedings.
Discussing an eventual trial date would be an “exercise in futility,” she said.
