{"id":2287718,"date":"2024-07-02T07:11:03","date_gmt":"2024-07-02T11:11:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/heres-what-could-get-tossed-from-trump-indictment-after-supreme-court-ruling-washington-examiner\/"},"modified":"2024-07-02T07:14:40","modified_gmt":"2024-07-02T11:14:40","slug":"heres-what-could-get-tossed-from-trump-indictment-after-supreme-court-ruling-washington-examiner","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/heres-what-could-get-tossed-from-trump-indictment-after-supreme-court-ruling-washington-examiner\/","title":{"rendered":"Here\u2019s what could get tossed from Trump indictment after Supreme Court ruling &#8211; Washington Examiner"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">30<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Fheres-what-could-get-tossed-from-trump-indictment-after-supreme-court-ruling-washington-examiner%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2287718&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><p>In \u2063a recent article from the Washington Examiner, Special\u200d Counsel Jack \u2064Smith&#8217;s indictment\u200c against former President Donald Trump may face significant changes following a Supreme Court \u2063ruling. The ruling stated that certain official acts by presidents are not prosecutable, casting\u2063 doubt on the validity \u2064of \u200dSmith&#8217;s case. The article outlines \u2062how Trump&#8217;s interactions with Vice President Mike\u200c Pence, conversations with Department of Justice\u200c officials, exchanges \u200dwith Jeffrey Clark, and public\u200c comments may now be challenged or removed\u200c from the \u2064indictment. The Supreme\u2062 Court&#8217;s decision will require Judge Tanya Chutkan to reevaluate specific acts in Trump&#8217;s indictment\u200c and determine whether they are prosecutable. the\u200d ruling has the potential to drastically impact the remaining charges against Trump and reshape the \u200bcourse \u200bof\u2062 the legal \u200cproceedings.  <\/p>\n<p class=\"readmore\">\n    <button onclick=\"showReadMore()\" id=\"readmorebtn\">Read more&#8230;<\/button>\n<\/p>\n<hr id=\"line\">\n<span id=\"more\"><\/p>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\"><span class=\"tdb-mobile-menu-button\"><i class=\"tdb-mobile-menu-icon td-icon-mobile\"><\/i><\/span><\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\"><span class=\"tdb-header-search-button-mob dropdown-toggle\" data-toggle=\"dropdown\"><i class=\"tdb-mobile-search-icon td-icon-search\"><\/i><\/span><\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\"><a class=\"tdb-logo-a\" href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/\" title=\"Washington Examiner\"><span class=\"tdb-logo-img-wrap\"><\/span><span class=\"tdb-logo-text-wrap\"><span class=\"tdb-logo-text-title\">Washington Examiner<\/span><\/span><\/a><\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\"><span class=\"tdb-mobile-menu-button\"><i class=\"tdb-mobile-menu-icon td-icon-mobile\"><\/i><\/span><\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\">\n<div class=\"tdb-drop-down-search\" aria-labelledby=\"td-header-search-button\">\n<div class=\"tdb-drop-down-search-inner\">\n<form method=\"get\" class=\"tdb-search-form\" action=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/\">\n<div class=\"tdb-search-form-inner\"><input class=\"tdb-head-search-form-input\" placeholder=\" \" type=\"text\" value name=\"s\" autocomplete=\"off\" \/><button class=\"wpb_button wpb_btn-inverse btn tdb-head-search-form-btn\" title=\"Search\" type=\"submit\"><span>Search<\/span><\/button><\/div>\n<\/form>\n<div class=\"tdb-aj-search\"><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/#\" role=\"button\" aria-label=\"Search\" class=\"tdb-head-search-btn dropdown-toggle\" data-toggle=\"dropdown\"><i class=\"tdb-search-icon td-icon-search\"><\/i><\/a><\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\"><a class=\"tdb-logo-a\" href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/\" title=\"Washington Examiner\"><span class=\"tdb-logo-img-wrap\"><\/span><span class=\"tdb-logo-text-wrap\"><span class=\"tdb-logo-text-title\">Washington Examiner<\/span><\/span><\/a><\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\">\n<h1 class=\"tdb-title-text\">Here\u2019s what could get tossed from Trump indictment after Supreme Court ruling<\/h1>\n<div><\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-title-line\"><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\">\n<div class=\"tdb-author-name-wrap\"><span class=\"tdb-author-by\">By<\/span> <a class=\"tdb-author-name\" href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/author\/ashley-oliver\/\">Ashley Oliver<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\"><time class=\"entry-date updated td-module-date\" datetime=\"2024-07-02T07:00:00-04:00\">July 2, 2024 7:00 am<\/time><\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\">\n<div id=\"Brid_1692621\" class=\"tpd-featured-video bridtv\"><\/div>\n<p>Special counsel <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/jack-smith\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"Jack Smith\">Jack Smith<\/a> accused former President <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/donald-trump\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"Jack Smith\">Donald Trump<\/a> of pressuring his vice president to derail the election certification in January 2021.<\/p>\n<p>Trump\u2019s interactions with Mike Pence were among several key acts Smith used to bring his election interference indictment against Trump, but the special counsel may now have to scrap these acts because of the Supreme Court\u2019s <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/news\/supreme-court\/3030301\/supreme-court-finds-some-immunity-for-presidents-complicating-trump-indictment\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title>decision<\/a> on Monday.<\/p>\n<p>The <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/mississippi-supreme-court-strikes-down-voter-approved-medical-marijuana-initiative\/\" title=\"Mississippi Supreme Court Strikes Down Voter-Approved Medical Marijuana Initiative\">high court ruled 6-3<\/a> along ideological lines that certain official acts by presidents are not prosecutable at all, while other official acts require the government to meet a high criteria before it can criminally charge a president for them.<\/p>\n<p>The ruling was a massive blow to Smith\u2019s case, which could look like a shell of its former self once the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/news\/justice\/3065816\/what-happens-next-jack-smiths-diminished-jan-6-case\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"lower courts have sifted through it\">lower courts have sifted through it<\/a> to align it with the Supreme Court\u2019s guidance.<\/p>\n<p>The decision came after Trump argued all four of his charges should be dropped because he had absolute immunity as president, which, he said, protected him from prosecution. The district court and appellate court in Washington, D.C., rejected Trump\u2019s claims, but the Supreme Court partly agreed with Trump.<\/p>\n<p>The high court\u2019s majority divided presidential acts into three categories: official acts that are absolutely immune from prosecution, official acts that are presumptively immune from prosecution until the government can prove the prosecution would not threaten the authority of the executive branch, and unofficial acts, which can always be prosecuted.<\/p>\n<p>Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is presiding over Trump\u2019s case at the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/democrats-push-court-packing-temper-tantrum-after-leaked-supreme-court-draft-opinion\/\" title=\"Democrats Push Court Packing Temper Tantrum After Leaked Supreme Court Draft Opinion\">lower court level<\/a>, must now hear arguments from parties about which specific acts are which and make excisions in Trump\u2019s indictment where appropriate.<\/p>\n<p>Chief Justice John Roberts offered a roadmap for Chutkan, saying Trump\u2019s communication with his Department of Justice officials when he was in office were core functions of Trump\u2019s job, for which he can absolutely not be prosecuted. Trump\u2019s communication with his vice president or state officials was less clear cut, Roberts wrote, noting the lower courts would have to sort that out.<\/p>\n<p>Complicating matters, Roberts wrote that prosecutors are not to raise questions about the motives behind a president\u2019s actions or use immunized official acts as evidence. These activities would serve to \u201cdistort Presidential decisionmaking,\u201d Roberts said.<\/p>\n<p>The question of how the Supreme Court\u2019s decision will look in practice is not fully clear at this stage, but below are examples of alleged acts in Smith\u2019s indictment that are now in jeopardy.<\/p>\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Trump\u2019s exchanges with Department of Justice officials<\/h2>\n<p>Smith repeatedly cited conversations Trump had with acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen and other DOJ officials in his indictment. To support the allegation that Trump knowingly defrauded the United States and deceived voters, Smith alleged the DOJ officials told Trump his claims about <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/in-nevada-a-corrupt-cash-for-votes-scheme-is-hiding-in-plain-sight\/\" title=\"In Nevada, A Corrupt Cash-For-Votes Scheme Is Hiding In Plain Sight\">widespread voter fraud<\/a> were unfounded.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cOn December 31 and January 3, the Defendant repeatedly raised with the Acting Attorney General and Acting Deputy Attorney General the allegation that in Pennsylvania, there had been 205,000 more votes than voters,\u201d Smith wrote. \u201cEach time, the Justice Department officials informed the Defendant that his claim was false.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Because the Supreme Court said DOJ communication is off limits from prosecution, Smith will likely no longer be able to rely on these details to support his charges.<\/p>\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Trump\u2019s exchanges with Jeffrey Clark<\/h2>\n<p>Clark appears as an unnamed co-conspirator in Trump\u2019s indictment. He served as acting head of the DOJ\u2019s Civil Division in 2020, and Smith alleged that Trump conspired with Clark on phone calls to circumvent his superiors at the DOJ in an effort to help Trump pressure state officials to overturn the election.<\/p>\n<p>As a DOJ official, Clark\u2019s communication with Trump may now be stripped from the case.<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, Clark has reason to celebrate the Supreme Court\u2019s decision for his own purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Clark was indicted along with Trump and others in a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/live-updates-trump-to-return-to-new-york-fraud-trial\/\" title=\"Trump to face New York fraud trial - Live updates\">separate election interference case<\/a> in Georgia, and the judge there may need to take his cues from the high court and reevaluate some of the charges. Clark was also at risk of losing his bar license because of the election cases, but he may avoid disbarment now.<\/p>\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Trump\u2019s alleged pressure on Pence<\/h2>\n<p>While the Supreme Court did not delve into Trump\u2019s indictment to separate all acts into the three categories it laid out, it did explicitly highlight Trump\u2019s interactions with his vice president as an example of what will become a \u201cdifficult question\u201d for Chutkan.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe indictment\u2019s allegations that Trump attempted to pressure the Vice President to take particular acts in connection with his role at the certification proceeding thus <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/turley-scotus-immunity-decision-produces-cardiac-arrest-for-jack-smith-in-trump-case\/\" title=\"Turley: SCOTUS Immunity Decision Produces &#039;Cardiac Arrest&#039; for Jack Smith in Trump Case\">involve official conduct<\/a>, and Trump is at least presumptively immune from prosecution for such conduct,\u201d Roberts wrote. \u201cThe question then becomes whether that presumption of immunity is rebutted under the circumstances. It is the Government\u2019s burden to rebut the presumption of immunity.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Smith alleged Trump conspired with others to attempt to \u201cenlist the Vice President to use his ceremonial role at the January 6 certification proceeding to fraudulently alter the election results.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>According to the Supreme Court, Smith will have to prove to Chutkan in the coming months that accusing Trump of such a pressure campaign does not threaten the authority of the executive branch.<\/p>\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Trump\u2019s comments to the public<\/h2>\n<p>The Supreme Court said that like communication with Pence, Trump\u2019s \u201ccomments to the general public\u201d could also be stripped from Smith\u2019s prosecution now.<\/p>\n<p>Trump was a frequent social media user in 2020 and 2021, and Smith seized on some of these posts to support his charges that Trump conspired to violate the rights of voters.<\/p>\n<p><strong><a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER<\/a><\/strong> <\/p>\n<p>\u201cOn December 3, the Defendant issued a Tweet amplifying the knowingly false claims made in Co Conspirator 1\u2019s [Rudy Giuliani\u2019s] presentation in Georgia,\u201d Smith wrote, adding that Trump posted that Democrats were \u201cballot stuffing\u201d and that Rudy Giuliani\u2019s presentation meant an \u201ceasy win\u201d for Trump in the battleground state.<\/p>\n<p>Smith will now have to justify to Chutkan that these posts were unofficial acts or official acts that are not immune from prosecution if he would like to use them against Trump.<\/p>\n<p> <script data-cfasync=\"false\" src=\"http:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/cdn-cgi\/scripts\/5c5dd728\/cloudflare-static\/email-decode.min.js\"><\/script><script>!function(){var g=window;g.googletag=g.googletag||{},g.googletag.cmd=g.googletag.cmd||[],g.googletag.cmd.push(function(){g.googletag.pubads().setTargeting(\"has-featured-video\",\"true\")})}();<\/script><script>var _bp=_bp||[];_bp.push({\"div\":\"Brid_1692621\",\"obj\":{\"id\":\"27789\",\"width\":\"1280\",\"height\":\"720\",\"stickyDirection\":\"below\",\"video\":\"1692621\"}});<\/script><script defer src=\"https:\/\/services.brid.tv\/player\/build\/brid.min.js\"><\/script><\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\">\n<ul class=\"tdb-tags\">\n<li><span>Tags<\/span><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/donald-trump\/\">Donald Trump<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/jack-smith\/\">Jack Smith<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/justice-department\/\">Justice Department<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/supreme-court\/\">Supreme Court<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/tag\/washington-dc\/\">Washington D.C.<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"tdb-block-inner td-fix-index\"><a class=\"tdb-logo-a\" href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/\" title=\"Washington Examiner\"><span class=\"tdb-logo-img-wrap\"><\/span><span class=\"tdb-logo-text-wrap\"><span class=\"tdb-logo-text-title\">Washington Examiner<\/span><\/span><\/a><\/div>\n<p><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Supreme Court ruling may force special counsel Jack Smith to remove certain key acts, such as Trump&#8217;s interactions with Mike Pence, from the election interference indictment against former President Donald Trump. The ruling stated that certain official acts by presidents are not prosecutable, while others require a high criteria to be met before a president can be charged. This decision significantly impacts Smith&#8217;s case, as he will need to make adjustments to align with the Supreme Court&#8217;s guidance. The ruling also highlighted that Trump&#8217;s communication with Department of Justice officials and his public comments may now be off limits for prosecution. Additionally, Trump&#8217;s alleged pressure on Pence and his exchanges with DOJ official Jeffrey Clark may also be in jeopardy due to the ruling<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":49,"featured_media":2287719,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/MixCollage-27-May-2024-09-14-PM-2889.jpg.optimal.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[15074,33118,33630,3634,32076],"class_list":["post-2287718","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","tag-indictment","tag-legal-proceedings","tag-supreme-court-ruling","tag-trump","tag-washington-examiner"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/MixCollage-27-May-2024-09-14-PM-2889.jpg.optimal.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2287718","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/49"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2287718"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2287718\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2287719"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2287718"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2287718"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2287718"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}