Lawyers for former President Donald Trump and special counsel Jack Smith returned to federal court on Thursday, marking the first hearing since U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan regained control of the case after the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling on presidential immunity. The hearing centered around pretrial proceedings and how they should progress following the July decision, which protects former presidents from prosecution for “official acts”, told NPR.
Trump, who did not attend the hearing, waived his right to appear. His lawyer, John Lauro, reaffirmed Trump’s not guilty plea during a brief arraignment on the new indictment. Trump faces the same four charges he did previously, despite some conduct being removed in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling.
Lauro and Smith’s team debated over the timeline for the case. While the special counsel urged for a swift proceeding, Lauro proposed extending pretrial proceedings well into 2025. Lauro also argued that the charges should be dismissed entirely, calling Smith’s appointment and indictment “illegitimate.”
“There are no special rules for the special counsel,” Lauro emphasized, pushing back against the proposed schedule. He criticized the process, saying, “I can’t imagine a more unfair protocol for proceeding on these weighty issues.”
The legal battle hinges on the scope of presidential immunity. The Supreme Court ruled that presidents are immune from criminal prosecution for official acts taken during their presidency, leaving some of Trump’s conduct in question. Chutkan must now decide whether Trump’s communications, particularly those with former Vice President Mike Pence about a strategy to overturn the 2020 election results, were official acts or private electioneering.
“They have not decided that,” Chutkan said regarding the Supreme Court’s ruling. “They’ve sent it back to me to figure that one out”, told BBC.
While Lauro argued that these communications should be covered by immunity, Chutkan pushed back, noting that those conversations might be subject to lesser protections and could still be challenged by federal prosecutors.
Throughout the hearing, Chutkan made it clear she would not be swayed by the upcoming presidential election. “The electoral process … is not relevant here,” she stated. Despite Lauro’s warnings about the weighty nature of the case, Chutkan stood firm, signaling that the trial will continue on its legal merits, not political implications.
The path forward in the case remains uncertain as both sides prepare for further motions and potential appeals.