Special counsel Jack Smith urges Supreme Court to reject Trump’s immunity claim

Special Counsel Jack Smith asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday to deny former President Donald Trump’s request for immunity in a 2020 federal election interference case.

Mr. Smith, 66 pages of filing The high court argued that President Trump’s “unconventional and comprehensive” immunity claim violates “a fundamental principle of our nation’s constitutional order,” which is that “no one, including the president, is above the law.” did.

“The president’s constitutional duty to see to the faithful execution of the law does not entail a general right to violate the law,” the special counsel wrote to the justices, adding that he has no immunity. I have laid out a series of arguments to refute President Trump’s assertion that there is. Criminal prosecution.

Smith on Monday asked the Supreme Court to deny President Trump’s request for presidential immunity. AP

“The Framers never supported impunity for former presidents, and every president since the founding of the nation to the present day has known that after leaving office, they face potential criminal liability for their acts of office.” said Smith.

“Historically, the closest parallel is President Nixon’s public actions during the Watergate scandal, where President Nixon’s acceptance of the pardon implied a recognition by Presidents Nixon and Ford that former presidents were subject to prosecution.” I did,” he added.

The special counsel criticized Trump, who is seen as the Republican presidential candidate, as “radical” for suggesting that “unless the president is explicitly named in the criminal law, the law does not apply.”

Smith said Trump’s interpretation of presidential immunity would “free the president from virtually all criminal laws, including crimes such as bribery, murder, treason, and sedition.”

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on President Trump’s immunity bid the week of April 22nd.

In February, a federal appeals panel unanimously rejected Trump’s claims, ruling that the former president did not have “unrestricted power to commit crimes that would nullify the most fundamental checks on executive power.” was lowered.

The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in the case later this month. AFP (via Getty Images)

Trump’s lawyers had argued that Smith could not be charged with the 2020 election conspiracy because it was related to his official duties.

They also argued that the House’s impeachment of Trump following the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol means the current case against him amounts to double jeopardy.

Mr. Trump’s lawyers have argued that Mr. Smith’s 2020 election conspiracy was related to his official duties and therefore could not be brought against the former president. AP

A federal grand jury last summer indicted President Trump on four felonies: conspiracy to commit fraud against the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights for allegedly trying to overturn the 2020 presidential election. was prosecuted. He lost to Joe Biden.

Smith accused President Trump of “deliberately making false claims” about voter fraud in a desperate effort to stay in power.

If the conservative-controlled Supreme Court rules in Trump’s favor, federal charges against him could be dropped.