The judge in Donald Trump’s trial for unlawful attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 US presidential election on Thursday set new deadlines for the next two months, including beyond Election Day in November.
• Also read: ‘My Perspective, the Truth’: Melania Trump Announces Memoir
• Also read: Kamala Harris accused of paralyzing woman in hit-and-run: fake news from Russia
• Also read: Trump offers Musk to lead draconian reforms if elected
Judge Tanya Chutkan thus noted the practical impossibility of setting a new date at this stage for this trial, initially scheduled to start on March 4, 2024, following the unprecedented decision of the Supreme Court on March 1er July recognizing broad criminal immunity for the President of the United States.
During the proceedings on Thursday, the first since she regained control of the case in August, the magistrate acknowledged that it would be “futile” for her to decide on a new trial date.
The timetable published at the end of the day therefore covers the dates on which the prosecution and the defence must submit their written arguments on the various pending questions and appeals.
On the central issue of the limits of presidential immunity, she agreed that the prosecution present its position to her by September 26, with a response from Donald Trump’s lawyers within three weeks, then a counter-argument from the prosecution by October 29.
The judge thus consented to the request of one of the prosecutors, Thomas Windom, who proposed that the prosecution take the initiative by demonstrating in writing in three weeks how the acts prosecuted were “of a private nature and, consequently, not covered by immunity.”
Donald Trump’s lawyer, John Lauro, had denounced a schedule that was “extremely prejudicial to President Trump.”
He insisted that the judge decide first whether presidential immunity covered conversations between Donald Trump and his then-vice president Mike Pence, which are at the heart of the case.
“If these communications are covered by immunity, then the entire prosecution is illegitimate,” and the whole case collapses, he argued.
“Presumption of immunity”
Judge Chutkan therefore did not follow him on this point. However, she upheld several of the defence’s demands.
In particular, it allowed her to request that the prosecution be dismissed on the grounds that the appointment and funding of special prosecutor Jack Smith was illegal. A federal judge in Florida (southeast) had cancelled another criminal procedure against the former president on this basis in July.
Judge Chutkan expressed skepticism about the merits of the appeal, but scheduled arguments for October 24 to November 7.
By a six-to-three majority — conservative justices versus progressives — the Supreme Court held that the president enjoyed “no immunity for his unofficial acts,” but was “entitled at least to a presumption of immunity for his official acts.”
The Court therefore assigned to the trial court the task of determining which acts were potentially immune from criminal prosecution.
The Republican candidate in the November 5 election, who declined to appear in court on Thursday, instructed his lawyers to formally declare that he was again pleading not guilty.
He is charged with “conspiracy against American institutions” and “violating the right to vote” of voters for his alleged pressure on local authorities in several key states to invalidate the official results of the election won by Democrat Joe Biden.
Targeted by several criminal proceedings, Donald Trump is doing everything he can to be tried as late as possible, in any case after the vote on November 5.
If re-elected, he could, once inaugurated in January 2025, order a halt to federal prosecutions against him.
