In the wake of the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling that former President Donald Trump has some immunity from prosecution for his movements while in office, Judge Tanya Chutkan will closely examine the federal government’s indictment of Trump for the fees he planned to overturn the 2020 election.
Chutkan, the district court that rules on the federal election case, is expected to hold hearings to determine which of Trump’s alleged moves included in the indictment were unofficial (and therefore potentially prosecuted, according to the Supreme Court’s ruling) and which were official and therefore unofficial. protected. .
For an in-depth look at the movements defined in the administration’s indictment of Trump, see Democracy on Trial. The two-and-a-half-hour documentary FRONTLINE examined the roots and ramifications of the federal government’s election argument against Trump, as well as Trump’s defense and claims of absolute immunity.
As the documentary explores, special counsel Jack Smith’s four-count indictment alleges that, while leading a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States, Trump acted to interfere with the federal government’s vote count; that obstructed the certification, on January 6, 2021, of President Joe Biden’s victory; and that he planned to deny the electorate the right to have their votes counted. Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee for the 2024 presidential election, pleaded guilty to the charges against him, insisted that the charges against him were politically motivated and claimed “absolute immunity” for movements he considers part of his job as president.
Read more: A Guide to Criminal Cases Against Donald Trump
The Supreme Court’s July 1 ruling already narrowed the scope of the indictment by noting that Trump is “absolutely safe” from prosecution for his conversations with Justice Department officials, conversations that, as Democracy on Trial reported, pressured the branch to do so. supporting Trump’s false claims of voter fraud.
Democracy on Trial reported on another piece of the federal case against Trump: his alleged crusade to force then-Vice President Mike Pence to help him stay in power. The Supreme Court ruling said that Trump’s alleged exhortation to Pence to replace election certification effects concerned official conduct and that Trump was therefore “presumed immune,” but that the government could simply attempt to eliminate that presumption “under the circumstances. “The ruling said the lower court is evaluating “whether a lawsuit involving Trump’s alleged attempts to influence the vice president’s oversight of the certification procedure would create risks of intrusion into the authority and purposes of the executive branch. “
The ruling left it up to the lower court whether Trump’s pressure campaign on state officials to overturn the effects of the presidential election was consistent with his official duties. These interactions are proven in detail in the documentary, and added to through the accounts of representatives of the states. of Georgia and Arizona.
Read more: Rusty Bowers, witness for a central accusation in Trump’s impeachment, speaks out
The conservative-majority Supreme Court also left it up to the lower court to assess whether the other moves taken by Trump described in the indictment were official or unofficial, adding Trump’s tweets after his election loss. As tested on Democracy on Trial, Trump called on his supporters to march on Washington on Jan. 6, 2021, the day Congress convened to certify Biden’s victory. That day, a mob of Trump supporters attacked the U. S. Capitol, disrupting the work of Congress for several hours.
The federal election lawsuit against Trump had been put on hold pending the Supreme Court’s ruling on Trump’s claims of absolute immunity. The reevaluation imposed by the court’s 6-3 ruling is expected to further delay Trump’s trial, making the federal trial even more prevalent before the November 2024 election.
Following the Supreme Court’s decision, Trump’s legal team made the decision to overturn his conviction last May in New York state. The jury’s landmark verdict made him the first former U. S. president to be convicted of a crime. Trump was convicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records to cover a “hush money” payment to an adult film star to prevent a scandal from circulating in the 2016 presidential campaign.
Read more: A historic conviction and Trump’s ex-‘fixer’
It remains to be seen how impact the Supreme Court’s ruling will have on other criminal cases opposed to Trump, adding a lawsuit in the state of Georgia for attempts to overturn the election and a federal lawsuit for improper handling of classified documents.
To learn more about the attitude and legal investigation into Trump’s four-count federal indictment, read the Democracy on Trial interviews. The collection is part of the FRONTLINE Transparency Project, which makes our resources available to the public. For more on the Supreme Court and the creation of its conservative majority, see Supreme Revenge: Battle for the Court.