Donald Trump isn’t inaugurated just yet. Plenty can still go wrong.
That’s what makes this Trump legal news so critical.
Legal Analysis of Jack Smith’s Dismissal of Case Against Trump Leaves Door Open for Future Prosecution
On Monday, MSNBC legal analyst Kristy Greenberg discussed special counsel Jack Smith’s decision to dismiss his case against President-elect Donald Trump, suggesting that the move leaves open the possibility of future prosecution once Trump is no longer in office.
Smith, in a filing on Monday, cited opinions from the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) which, in the context of Trump’s impending inauguration, required the dismissal of the case. However, Greenberg pointed out that Smith’s language suggests the door remains open for potential legal action after Trump’s presidency.
“Jack Smith says that yes, ‘the Constitution requires dismissal in this context, consistent with the temporary nature of immunity afforded to a sitting president, it doesn’t require dismissal with prejudice,’” Greenberg explained. She then quoted Smith’s statement: “Immunity from prosecution for a sitting president would not preclude such prosecution once the president’s term is over or he is otherwise removed from office by resignation or impeachment.” This wording, Greenberg noted, indicates that the special counsel could seek to prosecute Trump once his term has ended.
Greenberg also raised the issue of the statute of limitations, questioning whether it would be extended because of Trump’s temporary immunity from prosecution during his time in office. She expressed particular concern about the role of the incoming attorney general, who could influence the direction of the case. “The real question for me will be whether or not when the new AG comes in—what’s not clear is if Judge Tanya Chutkan will actually rule on this motion right away or if she will wait for the new AG,” Greenberg said. “The new AG may take a different position and may say this should be dismissed with prejudice, meaning then it’s completely over, there’s no way to bring this back after he is done with his term.”
Greenberg speculated that the incoming attorney general could support dismissing the case with prejudice, making it impossible to revive the charges after Trump’s presidency.
“What’s interesting,” Greenberg added, “is that Jack Smith kind of left the window open here.” This suggests that while Smith has chosen to pause the case for now, he is leaving open the possibility of future legal action.
The case against Trump stems from his alleged attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Smith had initially indicted Trump in August 2023, but the legal proceedings faced several delays, including the Supreme Court’s review of Trump’s appeal concerning presidential immunity. In July 2024, the Court ruled that former presidents are immune from prosecution for acts taken while in office. Following that decision, Smith filed a superseding indictment, which charged Trump with actions beyond his official presidential duties.
Smith’s team requested that all deadlines in the case be paused after Trump’s election victory to allow for further evaluation of the next steps. In the weeks leading up to the election, Chutkan had allowed Smith to file evidence against Trump publicly, which Trump’s legal team criticized as potential election interference.
Trump’s communications director, Steven Cheung, responded to the dismissal, calling it a “major victory for the rule of law.” He added, “The American People re-elected President Trump with an overwhelming mandate to Make America Great Again. Today’s decision by the DOJ ends the unconstitutional federal cases against President Trump, and is a major victory for the rule of law. The American People and President Trump want an immediate end to the political weaponization of our justice system and we look forward to uniting our country.”
THIS AFTERNOON: Jack Smith has dismissed the…
❌Trump Election Interference Case
❌Trump Classified Documents CaseThis lawfare was always unprecedented.
This lawfare was always wrong.
This lawfare was always politically-motivated.
And this lawfare MUST NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN. pic.twitter.com/xigUnwjeeu
— Byron Donalds (@ByronDonalds) November 25, 2024
Donald Trump’s allies, on the other hand, are declaring these charges being dropped as a complete victory, adding that this has been classic law-fare against Donald Trump that has rightfully failed.
The U.S. Senate’s Tom Cotton (R-AR) shared on X (also known as Twitter) that “The Jack Smith cases will be remembered as a dark chapter of weaponization. They never should have been brought. Our elections are decided by voters–not by fanatical, deranged liberal lawyers like Jack Smith.”
One of Donald Trump’s lawyers and advisors, Alina Habba, asked about whether the taxpayers will be reimbursed for Jack Smith wasting their taxpayer dollars on a sham trial. “Will Jack Smith reimburse taxpayers for the millions wasted on this bogus witch hunt he just dropped?” Habba asked.
Will Jack Smith reimburse taxpayers for the millions wasted on this bogus witch hunt he just dropped?
Asking for America. 🤔— Alina Habba (@AlinaHabba) November 25, 2024
Stay tuned to the DC Daily Journal.
