The U.S. Supreme Court has decided to consider an emergency application brought forth by special counsel Jack Smith in a case that affects hundreds of Americans detained on suspicion of involvement in the disturbance at the U.S. Capitol Building on January 6, 2021, as well as significant ramifications for former President Donald Trump.
Politico states that “the case calls into question prosecutors’ handling of an Enron-era obstruction law to punish those who stormed Congress.” The case stems from the prosecution of a defendant accused of pushing against officers and inciting a throng attempting to assault the Capitol.
The charge against Trump in Smith’s alleged “election interference” case is “obstruction of an official proceeding,” one of the felonies he faces. The maximum prison term for that charge alone is 20 years.
Smith filed the motion with the Supreme Court on Tuesday, and Trump’s attorneys accused Smith of interfering with the election.
Smith asked the nation’s highest court to rule quickly on a move he filed on Monday, asking the justices to decide whether Trump is immune from prosecution.
In a sharply worded statement, Trump’s 2024 reelection campaign attacked Smith and President Joe Biden—who is also seeking reelection—for their attempts to maintain the case’s March 4 trial date, which falls one day before the Super Tuesday primaries.
The Supreme Court granted Smith’s petition an expedited review, giving Trump until December 20 to reply.
A Trump spokesperson said of Deranged Jack Smith, “Crooked Joe Biden’s henchman, Smith is willing to try for a Hail Mary by racing to the Supreme Court and attempting to bypass the appellate process.” Smith is so obsessed with interfering in the 2024 Presidential Election to prevent President Trump from retaking the Oval Office, as the President is poised to do.
Smith’s supervision of the Department of Justice’s public integrity unit was mentioned in the statement. This unit was successful in convicting former Virginia Republican Governor Bob McDonnell of bribery and extortion in a gift case. Nevertheless, the conviction was later reversed by the Supreme Court in a 2016 8-0 ruling.
“The Supreme Court has not been kind to Deranged, including when the Court overturned him 8-0 in the McDonnell case, and handed down a rare unanimous rebuke,” the statement continued.
Following the denial of Trump’s claims of immunity by a district court judge last week, the former president’s legal team promptly filed an appeal, asking for a stay of the court proceedings.
Smith’s lawyers then claimed there was precedence from the early 1970s Nixon Watergate recordings case, and they requested the country’s highest court on Monday to consider the immunity question before a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., could make a decision.
“It is of imperative public importance that respondent’s claims of immunity be resolved by this Court and that respondent’s trial proceed as promptly as possible if his claim of immunity is rejected,” Smith’s team stated, acknowledging that this was a “extraordinary request” in a “extraordinary case.”
In case the Supreme Court declined to expedite the case before an appellate court ruling, the special counsel also filed a separate motion for accelerated procedures with the D.C. federal appeals court.