Judge in Trump election interference says immunity issue must be resolved before trial can proceed

Judge Tanya Chutkan on Thursday held the first hearing in former President Donald Trump’s federal election interference case since the Supreme Court immunity ruling that delayed the trial. The judge and both the prosecution and defense agreed that she would have to rule on presidential immunity before the trial can move forward. 

“Immunity is the linchpin here,” Chutkan said, after Trump’s legal team argued central components of the government’s case were protected by the high court ruling. 

“The issue of immunity will stop these proceedings once again,” she said, also arguing it would be “an exercise in futility” to set a trial date before those issues were resolved. She adjourned the hearing without clarifying the schedule going forward. 

This was the first hearing held at the federal court in Washington, D.C. since the high court ruled a U.S. president enjoyed immunity for official acts and issued guidance for the lower courts on how they should parse official and unofficial acts. The ruling forced Special Counsel Jack Smith, who is leading the prosecution, to revise his indictment against Trump. 

Trump’s lawyers argued that the new indictment against their client should be thrown out on the grounds that his interactions as president with his former vice president, Mike Pence, are covered under the immunity ruling as an official act. The prosecution argued that even if these interactions were covered under the ruling, it would not be an automatic dismissal. 

Trump’s legal team also suggested that if the prosecution was permitted to file a brief on immunity before the defense it would be “prejudicial” to their client. Trump attorney John Lauro said this prosecutor’s proposed approach raises concerns about what would come out on the court’s public record at a “sensitive time,” an apparent reference to the election, in which Trump is now the GOP presidential nominee.  

However, Judge Chutkan said that she would not factor the election into the timeline for the case. This court is not concerned with the electoral schedule,” Chutkan said, according to CNN. “That is not something I am going to consider.”

She also said "immunity needs to be dealt with as early as possible.”

The Supreme Court ruled in July that presidents have immunity for official acts, but not private ones, while in office. This ruling shook up the election interference case, delayed the timeline, and forced Special Counsel Jack Smith to revise his indictment against former President Trump. 

The new indictment adjusted the charges to better fit that Supreme Court ruling. For example, Smith dropped allegations that Trump tried to pressure Justice Department officials to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Smith kept charges like the conspiracy to defraud the United States and obstruction of an official proceeding. Overall, Smith did not change any of the four charges against the former president.