Earlier this week, prosecutors in the Trump January 6 case had asked permission to submit a massive filing containing “a detailed factual proffer” and “extensive footnote citations to an exhibit appendix.”
As I expected, Donald Trump’s attorneys pushed back, hoping to block the filing, but Judge Chutkan shot down the request.
Talking Points…
- Trump legal team tries to push back against Smith filing
- Judge Chutkan denies motion
- Analysis
Jack Smith’s prosecutors are about to submit a novel to the court that Trump was hoping to block. On Saturday, prosecutors submitted a filing to outline an upcoming brief that is about four times the length of what is considered acceptable. They justified the length of the brief by telling the court it would be of “great assistance to the Court in creating a robust record.”
Donald Trump’s attorneys pushed back, arguing:
“False, public allegations by the Special Counsel’s Office, presented through a document that has no basis in the traditional criminal justice process, will undoubtedly enter the dialogue around the election. The Gag Order prevents President Trump from explaining in detail why the Office’s selective and biased account is inaccurate without risking contempt penalties.
“The Office cannot be permitted to issue a massive and misleading public statement that is not responsive to a defense motion, and risks adverse impacts to the integrity of these proceedings, while simultaneously insisting on an unconstitutional prior restraint on President Trump’s ability to respond to their inaccurate assertions while he is campaigning.”
In a report for another publication, I had predicted:
“I will go out on a limb and say that Judge Chutkan will overrule the motion, saying that the charges were not filed within the 60-day cutoff window and that this is merely a continuation of an existing case.
“She has made it quite clear that she does not care that Trump is in an election and that his election schedule will not impact this case.”
That was pretty much right on target, as Chutkan issued a scathing ruling against Trump’s defense attorneys, calling them out for making claims “citing no authority.” And, as I predicted, she noted that the court could care less about Trump’s political agenda, stating:
“Defendant’s concern with the political consequences of these proceedings does not bear on the pretrial schedule.”
Chutkan, more or less, threw the entire motion by Trump’s legal team into the trash, stating:
“The court need not address the substance of those claims.
“Defendant does not explain how those putative violations cause him legal prejudice in this case, nor how this court is bound by or has jurisdiction to enforce Department of Justice policy.”
This is Donald Trump’s October surprise, and his campaign better be ready to deal with this when it comes out. Chutkan has made it clear from the outset that when Trump’s legal team brings an argument into her courtroom, it better be tight, or it will be dismissed, and that is what she did in this case.
Chutkan does not like Trump, and in other sentencing hearings, while not mentioning Trump by name, she has made it clear where she stands on his actions that day. She wants to see Trump behind bars, so you better believe she will do whatever it takes to hurt him in this election. I am not going to pat myself on the back too much for predicting her ruling because, watching Chutkan in action, this was a relatively easy prediction to make.
