WASHINGTON: The federal judge presiding over the election subversion case against former US President Donald Trump granted a request on Friday by prosecutors for more time to prepare.

The delay makes it even more unlikely that a trial in the historic case will take place before November’s presidential election, in which Trump is the Republican candidate. District Judge Tanya Chutkan had asked Special Counsel Jack Smith, who brought the charges against Trump, and defence lawyers to file a schedule by Friday for pretrial proceedings.

But Smith late on Thursday asked for an additional three weeks to prepare in light of the Supreme Court ruling that a former president has broad immunity from criminal prosecution.

“The Government continues to assess the new precedent set forth last month in the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v the United States,” Smith said. He requested that Chutkan delay the submission of the schedule for pretrial proceedings until August 30 and the judge agreed.

Chutkan also agreed to delay a status hearing in the case from August 16 to September 5. Chutkan regained jurisdiction over the case last week after it was paused so the Supreme Court could rule on the immunity question.

The conservative-dominated top court ruled 6-3 on July 1 that an ex-president has broad immunity from prosecution for official acts conducted while in office, but can be pursued for unofficial acts.

Trump is accused of conspiracy to defraud the United States and conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding — the January 6, 2021 joint session of Congress that was attacked by Trump supporters. Trump is also accused of seeking to disenfranchise American voters with his false claims that he won the 2020 election.

He was originally scheduled to go on trial on March 4, but it was put on hold while his lawyers pushed his claim of presidential immunity all the way up to the Supreme Court.

‘Official and unofficial acts’

It will be up to Chutkan, an appointee of former Democratic President Barack Obama, to decide which of Trump’s actions regarding the 2020 election were official acts and which were unofficial acts subject to potential prosecution. That — along with other pre-trial issues — is expected to take months, making it unlikely the case will go to trial before the November 5 election between Trump and Democratic candidate Kamala Harris.

Trump was convicted in New York in May of 34 counts of falsifying business records to cover up hush money payments made to adult film star Stormy Daniels. Sentencing has been scheduled for September 18, but Trump’s lawyers have asked for his conviction to be tossed, citing the Supreme Court immunity ruling.

Trump also faces charges in Georgia related to efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election he lost to Democrat Joe Biden. Trump was also charged in Florida with mishandling top secret documents after leaving the White House, but the judge presiding over the case, Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, dismissed the charges on the grounds that Smith, the special counsel, was unlawfully appointed. Smith has appealed Cannon’s ruling.

Published in Dawn, August 10th, 2024

Opinion

Editorial

Lakki police protest
12 Sep, 2024

Lakki police protest

Police personnel are on thed front line in the campaign against militancy, and their concerns cannot be dismissed.
Interwoven crises
12 Sep, 2024

Interwoven crises

THE 2024 World Risk Index paints a concerning picture for Pakistan, placing it among the top 10 countries most...
Saving lives
12 Sep, 2024

Saving lives

Access to ethical and properly trained mental health professionals must be made available to all.
Dark turn
Updated 11 Sep, 2024

Dark turn

What transpired in Islamabad should give at least the old guard within the more established political parties some pause.
Clearing the air
11 Sep, 2024

Clearing the air

THE rumour mill had been working overtime regarding a purported extension for the chief justice of the country....
Deplorable remarks
11 Sep, 2024

Deplorable remarks

It is a matter of grave concern that Imran Khan reportedly defended Gandapur’s hideous remarks about the Punjab CM and female journalists.