Special counsel Jack Smith has requested the dismissal of both the election interference and classified documents cases against President-elect Trump, citing a longstanding DOJ policy that prevents the prosecution of a sitting president.
In the filing related to the January 6th case, Smith’s team explained that the DOJ had concluded, after careful review, that the legal interpretations from the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) on the constitutional prohibition against prosecuting a sitting president should apply in this instance.
As a result, the cases must be dismissed before Trump assumes office. The filing emphasized that this legal restriction is unconditional and does not depend on the severity of the charges or the strength of the evidence.
Jack Smith signals closure while leaving room for investigative report
If Judge Tanya Chutkan approves the motion, it would bring an end to the efforts to hold Trump accountable for attempting to undermine the peaceful transfer of power, which led to the Capitol attack on January 6th. The filing noted that Trump’s legal team did not oppose the motion.
In the Florida case, where Trump faces charges related to the Espionage Act and obstruction of justice, Smith has also requested the dismissal of an appeal concerning a ruling that sought to dismiss the case. This move would similarly put an end to that legal challenge.
However, the DOJ intends to continue its case against Trump’s two co-defendants, Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, as neither of them holds immunity. These two individuals’ cases will now be left to the future Trump administration’s DOJ, which is expected to undergo restructuring, potentially leading to the dismissal of all current prosecutors involved.
Trump’s spokesperson, Steven Cheung, celebrated the DOJ’s decision, calling it a victory for the rule of law, and emphasized that the American people re-elected Trump with a clear mandate, rejecting what they see as the politicization of the justice system.
Smith plans to step down from his position at the DOJ before Trump’s inauguration, but could still submit a report detailing his findings, pending approval from Attorney General Merrick Garland. Such a report would offer a public account of the investigation.
In 1973, the OLC issued a memo stating that a sitting president could not be prosecuted, and the Supreme Court recently extended this principle, ruling that former presidents also retain substantial immunity.
Smith acknowledged that the decision to request dismissal was difficult, noting that while the legal foundation of the case had not shifted, the upcoming inauguration of Trump had changed the context. He explained that this posed a conflict between the necessity for a president to govern unhindered and the nation’s commitment to the principle that no one is above the law.
Despite the challenges introduced by the Supreme Court’s ruling, Smith continued with the case, filing a new indictment that kept the original charges but omitted references to Trump’s attempts to pressure the DOJ, which the Court had deemed protected by immunity. After Trump’s election, Smith indicated his intention to pause both cases, with plans to update the court by December 2.
In the documents case, Smith had appealed Judge Aileen Cannon’s decision that ruled his appointment as special counsel was unlawful. Many legal analysts believed Smith still had a strong chance of pursuing the case, particularly since an appeals court had previously overturned Cannon’s ruling.
