The special counsel pursuing federal criminal charges against former President Donald Trump for his actions related to overturning the 2020 election loss has filed a U.S. Supreme Court brief urging the justices to reject Trump’s bid for immunity from prosecution. The case is scheduled to be argued before the justices on April 25.
In his filing before the Supreme Court, Special Counsel Jack Smith emphasized the principle that “no person is above the law,” stating that Trump’s actions, if he is convicted, would constitute “an unprecedented assault on the structure of our government.”
Smith argued that the effective functioning of the presidency does not require immunity from accountability for alleged violations of federal criminal law. He highlighted that a fundamental principle of the constitutional order is that no individual, including the president, is exempt from the law.
Trump, the first former president to face criminal prosecution, is challenging the criminal case brought by Smith, contending that he should be shielded from prosecution because he was serving as president when the actions in question occurred.
In response to Trump’s claims of immunity, Smith reiterated that a former president does not have “absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for his official acts.” He warned against the potential misuse of immunity, stating that without it, “the threat of future prosecution and imprisonment would become a political cudgel to influence the most sensitive and controversial presidential decisions.”
The charges against Trump, brought by Smith in August 2023, include conspiring to defraud the United States, obstructing the congressional certification of President Joe Biden’s electoral victory, and conspiring against the right of Americans to vote.
Supporting Smith’s argument, a group of 19 retired four-star U.S. military officers and former high-ranking national security officials, including retired Army Generals Peter Chiarelli and George Casey, former CIA Director Michael Hayden, and former Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, filed a friend-of-the-court brief. They described Trump’s claim of presidential immunity as “contrary to the foundational principles of our democracy.”
The former officials emphasized that rejecting Trump’s theory of immunity is crucial to upholding America’s role as a guardian of democracy and preventing the spread of authoritarianism. They warned that accepting Trump’s claim could jeopardize national security, both in the United States and globally.
The Supreme Court’s decision to hear arguments on Trump’s immunity bid in late April has postponed his trial, providing a delay as he seeks to regain the presidency. Trump had previously sought to have the charges dismissed based on his immunity claim, but U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan rejected this in December. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld this decision in February, ruling 3-0 against Trump’s claim of immunity.
The charges against Trump stem from his false claims that the 2020 election was stolen, as well as his efforts to use false electors to disrupt the congressional certification of Biden’s victory. Trump also pressured then-Vice President Mike Pence to block the certification. The culmination of these efforts was the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters in an attempt to prevent the certification process.
