A federal judge on Thursday approved the public release of redacted source documents that helped inform special counsel Jack Smith’s explosive 165-page legal brief arguing that Donald Trump can still face prosecution for trying to subvert the results of the 2020 election, but gave the former president seven days to take steps to block the disclosure.
Sign up for Fact Checker, our weekly review of what's true, false or in-between in politics.
In a two-page order, U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan ordered the release of a four-part appendix — with potentially significant redactions — listing the sources of quotes and information to support last week’s filing, which was meant to detail how the case could go forward after the Supreme Court ruled this summer that Trump enjoyed broad immunity.
That ruling forced prosecutors to return a slimmed-down indictment alleging Trump conspired to overturn the legitimate results of the 2020 election by using knowingly false claims about election fraud to obstruct the government’s processes for collecting, counting and certifying the vote. The justices left it to Chutkan to sort out how to move forward.
Trump lawyers John Lauro and Todd Blanche had earlier asked the judge to keep the appendix hidden from public view, writing in a short filing, “There should be no further disclosures at this time of the so-called ‘evidence’ that the special counsel’s Office has unlawfully cherry-picked and mischaracterized — during early voting in the 2024 Presidential election — in connection with an improper Presidential immunity filing that has no basis in criminal procedure or judicial precedent.”
🌸
Follow D.C. region
Prosecutors said the appendix could include information and quotations from public material — such as congressional Jan. 6 witness transcripts — but that information from nonpublic sources such as grand jury transcripts, witness interview reports and sealed search warrant returns would remain redacted.
Skip to end of carousel
Subscribe to The Trump Trials newsletter to get the latest updates on Donald Trump’s four criminal cases in your inbox.
End of carousel
In her order, Chutkan asserted that Trump’s lawyers identified “no specific substantive objections to particular proposed redactions,” as she said they had failed to do in unsuccessfully opposing the release of last week’s broader filing. For the same reasons, the judge said she found his defense’s “blanket objections to further unsealing are without merit,” and that its concern with the political consequences on his 2024 Republican presidential campaign “is not a cognizable legal prejudice.”
Still, Chutkan gave Trump’s lawyers a week to “evaluate litigation options.”
Chutkan previously gave Trump permission to file an up-to-180-page immunity argument of his own by Nov. 7, with further litigation to continue into December. No trial date has been set as the case is likely to make its way back to the Supreme Court. If Trump wins the election, he is widely expected to order the Justice Department to end the case.
In the filing unsealed last week, prosecutors painted a scathing portrait of Trump’s actions after his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden, presenting scores of witnesses and a handful of co-conspirators with whom it alleged Trump “launched a series of increasingly desperate plans to overturn the legitimate election results in seven states that he had lost.”
Prosecutors maintained that Trump operated in his private capacity as a candidate, not in his official capacity as president, which the high court ruled would be immune from criminal prosecution.
Sign up for Fact Checker, our weekly review of what's true, false or in-between in politics.
In a two-page order, U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan ordered the release of a four-part appendix — with potentially significant redactions — listing the sources of quotes and information to support last week’s filing, which was meant to detail how the case could go forward after the Supreme Court ruled this summer that Trump enjoyed broad immunity.
That ruling forced prosecutors to return a slimmed-down indictment alleging Trump conspired to overturn the legitimate results of the 2020 election by using knowingly false claims about election fraud to obstruct the government’s processes for collecting, counting and certifying the vote. The justices left it to Chutkan to sort out how to move forward.
Trump lawyers John Lauro and Todd Blanche had earlier asked the judge to keep the appendix hidden from public view, writing in a short filing, “There should be no further disclosures at this time of the so-called ‘evidence’ that the special counsel’s Office has unlawfully cherry-picked and mischaracterized — during early voting in the 2024 Presidential election — in connection with an improper Presidential immunity filing that has no basis in criminal procedure or judicial precedent.”
🌸
Follow D.C. region
Prosecutors said the appendix could include information and quotations from public material — such as congressional Jan. 6 witness transcripts — but that information from nonpublic sources such as grand jury transcripts, witness interview reports and sealed search warrant returns would remain redacted.
Skip to end of carousel
Sign up for The Trump Trials newsletter
Subscribe to The Trump Trials newsletter to get the latest updates on Donald Trump’s four criminal cases in your inbox.
End of carousel
In her order, Chutkan asserted that Trump’s lawyers identified “no specific substantive objections to particular proposed redactions,” as she said they had failed to do in unsuccessfully opposing the release of last week’s broader filing. For the same reasons, the judge said she found his defense’s “blanket objections to further unsealing are without merit,” and that its concern with the political consequences on his 2024 Republican presidential campaign “is not a cognizable legal prejudice.”
Still, Chutkan gave Trump’s lawyers a week to “evaluate litigation options.”
Chutkan previously gave Trump permission to file an up-to-180-page immunity argument of his own by Nov. 7, with further litigation to continue into December. No trial date has been set as the case is likely to make its way back to the Supreme Court. If Trump wins the election, he is widely expected to order the Justice Department to end the case.
In the filing unsealed last week, prosecutors painted a scathing portrait of Trump’s actions after his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden, presenting scores of witnesses and a handful of co-conspirators with whom it alleged Trump “launched a series of increasingly desperate plans to overturn the legitimate election results in seven states that he had lost.”
Prosecutors maintained that Trump operated in his private capacity as a candidate, not in his official capacity as president, which the high court ruled would be immune from criminal prosecution.
