Jan. 2 (UPI) — In a new filing in the federal election interference case against former President Donald Trump, special counsel Jack Smith cites a previous argument from Trump that immunity from prosecution ends with presidency.
Smith’s filing to the D.C. court of appeals, made public on Saturday, is the clearest rundown yet of the prosecution’s case against granting Trump immunity from prosecution. Oral arguments are slated to be heard on Jan. 9.
Trump’s defense team has claimed he has broad immunity from being prosecuted for his role in attempting to stop the certification of the 2020 election and inciting a riot at the U.S. Capitol. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan has previously denied Trump’s immunity claim before pausing the case until the immunity question is resolved.
The prosecution’s argument cites a past attempt by Trump to claim immunity in another case.
In Trump vs. Vance, then-Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance sought to obtain the former president’s tax records in an investigation into alleged hush money payments made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels. Trump argued he had absolute immunity that “would expire when the president leaves office.”
“Indeed, the Executive Branch and multiple presidents, including the defendant, have consistently acknowledged that any criminal immunity ends once a president leaves office,” Smith’s filing reads.
The prosecution goes on to warn of the potential risks of granting Trump or any president such broad immunity. It argues that this would open the door for protecting a president who accepts bribes in exchange for “lucrative government contracts — as long as it takes the form of correspondence with a state official about a matter in which there is federal interest.”
It could also protect a president from prosecution if they instruct an FBI director to plant incriminating evidence on a political enemy, the prosecution writes.
“Under the defendant’s framework, the nation would have no recourse to deter a president from inciting his supporters during a State of the Union address to kill opposing lawmakers — thereby hamstringing any impeachment proceeding — to ensure that he remains in office unlawfully,” prosecutors argue.
Trump’s defense team has until Wednesday to reply to Smith’s filing. The timing of the appeals court’s decision could throw the scheduled March 4 start date of the trial into question.
Meanwhile, Trump is campaigning for the Republican nomination for re-election.
