Trump Defense Spars With Judge Over Election Timing in DC Case

The federal judge presiding over the 2020 election-interference prosecution against Donald Trump suggested the former president’s defense team was trying to drag out the case as he campaigns for a return to the White House in the Nov. 5 election, a claim his lawyers disputed.
US District Judge Tanya Chutkan indicated Thursday she would soon set a schedule for Trump’s next attempts at getting the case tossed out. The hearing in Washington was the first court appearance since prosecutors revised an indictment of the former president over allegations he tried to overturn the 2020 election. Trump wasn’t present, but his attorneys entered his plea of not guilty.
Trump’s legal counsel argued against a government proposal that they said would let prosecutors control what information and evidence becomes public in the weeks before the election. Responding to references by Trump’s lawyer John Lauro to this being a “sensitive time,” Chutkan said that she understood the election was approaching but stressed that it wasn’t “relevant” to her handling of the case, a point she’s made before.
During sometimes tense exchanges with Lauro, Chutkan said it seemed as though Trump’s team was trying to “affect the presentation of evidence” to avoid influencing the election. Lauro denied that, saying they wanted careful consideration of weighty issues related to the US presidency.
The case, which was initially filed last year, was paused by Chutkan for months as the US Supreme Court considered whether Trump was entitled to immunity from criminal charges. The conservative majority held in July that presidents are shielded from prosecution for official acts. 
The justices found that parts of the indictment related to Trump’s communications with US government officials were covered by that immunity. But they sent the case back to Chutkan for more litigation over how much of the rest of the case could go forward. In August, prosecutors filed an updated indictment that removed allegations the Supreme Court said were off limits, but left most if it intact. Trump was formally arraigned on the latest indictment on Thursday but waived being in court to enter his not guilty plea.
Trump’s lawyers said in recent court papers that they plan to argue the indictment still includes immunized official conduct, especially related to his interactions with Vice President Mike Pence. On Thursday they asked to brief issues related to Pence first, contending that if those are covered by immunity, the whole indictment should be tossed out as tainted.
Prosecutor Thomas Windom proposed the government first file a brief laying out the evidence they planned to rely on and arguments for why the indictment survives the Supreme Court’s immunity test. Pressed by Chutkan, Windom said the government was prepared to finish that document in three weeks.
The defense also wants to argue that case should be dismissed because Smith’s appointment and funding were unconstitutional. Trump successfully pressed the appointment issue in another case Smith brought in Florida accusing the former president of unlawfully keeping classified documents and trying to obstruct government efforts to retrieve them.
Chutkan said on Thursday that she didn’t find US District Judge Aileen Cannon’s ruling “particularly persuasive,” and noted that there is binding legal precedent in Washington upholding the lawfulness of special counsels.
Prosecutors have appealed Cannon’s dismissal of the documents case to the 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals, but there’s no hearing date yet.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.