Trump’s election lawsuit dismissed after special counsel Jack Smith sought dismissal, citing Justice Department’s ‘categorical’ policy

Judge to oversee Donald Trump’s trial election interference case On Monday, he dismissed the case after special prosecutor Jack Smith asked the judge to throw out the case because of the Justice Department’s long-standing policy barring prosecution of a sitting president.

Earlier Monday, Smith filed a motion to dismiss the case, as well as Trump’s appeal. secret documents caseNot because of the Justice Department’s presidential immunity policy ahead of Trump’s upcoming inauguration, and not because the charges are baseless.

Smith also asked the judge in Trump’s classified documents case to allow Trump’s appeal against his two co-defendants in the case, Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, to proceed.

U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan dismissed election interference charges against Trump without prejudice, leaving open the highly unlikely possibility of future prosecution.

In his two-page opinion, Judge Chutkan wrote that dismissing the case without prejudice was “appropriate” and would not harm the “public interest,” and agreed with Smith’s contention that Trump’s immunity would not extend to him once he leaves office.

“Dismissal without prejudice is also consistent with the Government’s understanding that the immunity granted to the sitting President is temporary and will terminate when he leaves office,” Chutkan said. he wrote.

But it is extremely unlikely that any prosecutor will attempt to bring the same charges in the future; That’s partly because the statute of limitations on the alleged crimes expired four years after Trump left office.

Trump’s lawyers did not oppose the government’s request to dismiss the case without prejudice.

Smith’s requests come nearly 16 months after the grand jury First accusation against Trump For their alleged efforts to unlawfully overturn the 2020 election results.

“This prohibition is categorical and does not affect the gravity of the crimes charged, the strength of the Government’s evidence, or the merits of the investigation, which the Government fully supports,” Smith said in his motion to dismiss.

“The nation has never encountered a situation where a federal indictment against a citizen was returned by a grand jury and criminal prosecution was already in progress when the defendant was elected President,” the motion said. The statement was included. “After careful consideration, the Department determined that the OLC’s prior views regarding the Constitution’s prohibition on federal indictment and prosecution of a sitting president apply to this situation and, as a result, this prosecution should be dismissed before the defendant takes office.”

Smith moved to dismiss Trump’s objection to the charges against Trump in the classified documents case. He did not admit his guilt After U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the case in July because she found Smith was improperly appointed to his position, 40 criminal charges were filed last year related to classified material after he left the White House. Smith appealed that decision to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that legal precedent and history confirm the attorney general’s authority to appoint special counsels.

Monday’s filing asks the court to reject that appeal, but the court intends to keep the appeal in place for Nauta and De Oliveira, two Trump employees who have pleaded not guilty to obstruction charges.

“The appeal regarding the other two defendants will continue because, unlike defendant Trump, the principle of temporary immunity does not apply to them,” it was stated in the file.

“The Special Counsel’s decision to pursue this case even after dismissing the case against President Trump is an unsurprising tribute to the poor judgment that led to the indictment against Mr. De Oliveira,” De Oliveira’s attorney, John Irving, said in a statement. First of all, just because you can doesn’t mean you should. “If they want a slow acquittal, that’s fine with us.”

Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung called Smith’s demands “a major victory for the rule of law” in a statement and said: “The American People and President Trump want an immediate end to the political weaponization of our justice system, and that’s what we’re looking at.” ” “We continue to unite our country.”

Trump in election interference case last year He did not admit his guilt The federal charges accuse him of undertaking a “criminal scheme” to overturn the 2020 election results by including a list of so-called “fake voters,” using the Justice Department to conduct “fake election criminal investigations,” and trying to impeach the vice president to “alter the election results.” and promoting false claims that the election was stolen during the attack on the Capitol on January 6, all with the aim of subverting democracy and remaining in power.

Smith then called Trump, Supreme Court’s July decision That Trump is entitled to immunity from criminal prosecution for official actions he took as president.

Judge Chutkan earlier this month canceled remaining deadlines Smith is in the election interference lawsuit after requesting time following Trump’s election to “assess this unprecedented situation and determine the appropriate course forward consistent with Department of Justice policy.”

Judge Chutkan was in the process of considering how the case should proceed in light of the Supreme Court’s immunity decision.

Smith faces a Dec. 2 deadline for both the election interference lawsuit and the classified documents lawsuit after Smith’s team requested more time to determine how to confront the unprecedented situation of ongoing federal lawsuits against a newly elected president. he was faced with.

Monday’s filings were received a week earlier than planned, raising the question of whether Smith might run out of time to officially close his office and submit his final report to Attorney General Merrick Garland, as he was asked to do according to the Justice Department’s special report. Consultation arrangements – prior to Opening Day.

The final report will need to undergo a classification review by the intelligence community; This is a process that can sometimes take weeks to be approved for any public release.

In speeches before Congress and in public statements, Garland has made clear that he is committed to making public the final reports of all special counsels during his term. special counsel Robert Hur following its investigation into President Joe Biden’s handling of classified documents before assuming the presidency and special counsel John Durham Following its investigation into the 2016 Russia investigation.

Special Prosecutor David Weiss is still continuing his investigation into FBI informant Alexander Smirnov. He did not admit his guilt He will bring the case to trial in California next week on charges that he lied about President Biden and his son Hunter Biden. It is unclear whether Trump will be able to formally complete the investigation and submit a final report before his inauguration.