Trump’s lawyers asked the judge in his Jan. 6 case to keep the stay in place for one month so that the defense and special counsel Jack Smith can file their “immunity appendices” at the same time, after the 2024 election.
While Smith’s immunity brief had already been made public a few days before, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan said that the prosecution’s redacted appendix should also be made public because Trump’s “concern with the political consequences of these proceedings” is not a legal prejudice that can be taken into account.
The judge also put her order on hold and gave Trump’s team seven days to “evaluate litigation options.”
After seven days, the defense asked the judge, who was chosen by Barack Obama, to keep the stay in place until November 14. They said this because “the public has been poisoned by a one-sided prosecutorial narrative.”
“If, like in this case, a prosecutor is allowed to release huge files publicly that look into how a President made decisions while in office, future Presidents will be much less likely to take the “bold and unhesitating action” that is expected of them,” the defense said.
“This is true even if normal procedures are followed, with the President filing the first document. But it’s especially bad when neither the Constitution nor the rules of criminal procedure based on our founding principles have been followed, letting the prosecution file first without expecting a motion to dismiss.”
The defense said that a stay extension would not “eliminate these harms” to Trump “and the public,” but it would “at least bring these proceedings closer to a structure mandated by the Supreme Court and Constitutionally required.”
Trump’s lawyers used a number of critical articles, written by people like Jack Goldsmith, who was Assistant Attorney General under George W. Bush, and Elie Honig, a senior legal analyst for CNN, to say that there is at least “a concerning appearance of election interference.”
They didn’t say whether Smith’s evidence-related filings were “politically motivated” or just timed for election season.
The defense said that extending the stay would help the “public’s faith in the fairness of these proceedings and the court’s duty to remain apolitical.” This is a similar argument to the one made to delay Trump’s sentencing in the hush-money case.
Does it work?
Some lawyers, like Eric Columbus, who worked for the Obama administration and the Jan. 6 Committee, saw the move as a “prelude” to Trump lawyers asking the U.S. Supreme Court to get involved again.
