The Supreme Court could take on Donald Trump's case this term: lawyer

A former federal prosecutor said the Supreme Court may hear an appeal in Donald Trump's voter fraud case this term.

Joyce Vance responded to the release of a 165-page evidentiary brief outlining the case against Trump after the Supreme Court granted him broad immunity from prosecution.

Trump is accused of conspiring to defraud the United States; conspiracy to obstruct an official congressional proceeding; Obstructing and attempting to obstruct an official proceeding; and conspiracy against right-wingers in connection with an alleged pressure campaign on state officials to overturn the 2020 election results. Newsweek sent an email to the Trump campaign seeking comment on Friday.

The Republican candidate has denied all allegations made against him and has 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 through a criminal prosecution.

Vance wrote on her legal blog “Civil Discourse” on Friday that prosecutors had included much of the evidence against the former president but portrayed it as his personal conduct, not presidential conduct.

She believes this will lead to a second Supreme Court decision in the case, as the court must decide whether the prosecution's evidence is consistent with its July 1 ruling on presidential immunity.

Which side of the Supreme Court appeal will depend on how Judge Tanya Chutkan rules on the prosecution's evidence, Vance added.

“Trump will be able to appeal its decisions about what is not protected by immunity, and the administration can appeal any decisions it makes about what is immunity.”

“That could mean that the Supreme Court docks the case for this term — if the appeals court receives it so quickly — orders a briefing and oral argument, and doesn’t make a decision until June or July,” Vance wrote.

She added that the case could go first to the federal appeals court or the Supreme Court could take it directly.

“Look for the government to ask the Supreme Court to hear the case directly, without waiting for the appeals court,” Vance wrote. “The government made this request last time and the Supreme Court rejected it, but at this point there is really no reason to let the appeals court speculate about what the Supreme Court meant by its immunity decision in the Trump case.”

In late August, Smith filed an updated indictment against Trump, reshaping the case to comply with the Supreme Court's ruling granting sitting presidents immunity from certain “official” actions.

The new indictment eliminates all allegations against Trump regarding attempts to pressure the Department of Justice (DOJ) to falsely declare that President Joe Biden's 2020 election victory was the result of massive fraud.

Vance wrote that Wednesday's court filings show Smith still managed to retain much of the evidence.

“Now we have a clear idea of ​​what Smith believes is still on the table following the Supreme Court decision. The short version: pretty much everything.” Smith acknowledges that the court excised Trump's interactions with DOJ officials from the case, but he argues that “everything else is either private conduct, which is fair game, or official conduct, which he can overcome the presumption of immunity,” Vance added.