Former President Donald Trump’s lawyers told a federal court Tuesday not to make public any sensitive information in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s prosecution of the former president stemming from Mr. Trump’s challenging the 2020 election results.
Specifically, Mr. Trump’s lawyers want the judge to curtail revelations out of a lengthy sealed filing made by Mr. Smith over concerns of witness safety and the defendant’s constitutional rights while voters have begun casting ballots in the presidential election.
Mr. Trump’s attorneys urged Judge Tanya Chutkan in a 7-page motion to reject Mr. Smith’s request to make parts of his recent court filing public, after the federal government had submitted it under seal.
“The true motivation driving the efforts by the Special Counsel’s Office to disseminate witness statements that they previously sought to lock down is as obvious as it is inappropriate,” the Trump team’s filing stated. “The Office wants their politically motivated manifesto to be public, contrary to the Justice Manual and longstanding [Justice Department] norms in cases not involving President Trump, in the final weeks of the 2024 Presidential election while early voting has already begun throughout the United States.”
His lawyers point out the special counsel had previously kept some of this information — grand jury testimony, witness statements and warrants — private due to it being classified as sensitive.
“Now that public disclosure serves their politically motivated mission, the Special Counsel’s Office takes a different view,” Mr. Trump’s lawyers argued. “The Office believes President Trump’s Constitutional rights to impartial jurors and fair proceedings — to say nothing of witness privacy and even safety — all take a back seat to the Office’s political goals.”
The pushback from Mr. Trump’s legal team comes after Mr. Smith requested to file a redacted version of his more than 180-page brief last week in his revised criminal prosecution against the former president over the contest of the 2020 election results and the Jan. 6, 2021 riot at the U.S. Capitol.
The contents of the massive legal filing were under seal, but it is possible that some of it may be made public in the coming weeks, just before the Nov. 5 election.
Mr. Smith’s legal team was given the green light by Judge Chutkan, an Obama appointee, to file the oversized motion. The normal limit is 45 pages.
The federal government said it expected to use the extra pages to provide the court with “a detailed factual proffer” with attached exhibits, following the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity this summer.
Mr. Trump’s team protested the oversized motion, saying that the government “aims to proffer their untested and biased views to the court and the public as if they are conclusive.”
Mr. Smith’s team aims to defend its updated indictment accusing Mr. Trump of conspiring to overthrow the 2020 election results.
The indictment has been rewritten in light of a Supreme Court ruling in July that seemed to undercut some of Mr. Smith’s core accusations against the former president.
The 6-3 decision by the high court found that a president has immunity for core official acts and presumed immunity for some other official conduct, but no immunity for unofficial acts. It was seen as a win for Mr. Trump because it delayed criminal proceedings against him while lower courts grappled with which charges could stand.
Mr. Smith adjusted his indictment against Mr. Trump by removing some official actions from the allegations, such as communications with Justice Department officials. He kept all four original charges: conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights.
The sealed filing is expected to reveal evidence that supports the revised indictment.
Judge Chutkan said during the roughly 80-minute hearing last month that it was too early to settle on a trial date.
• Alex Swoyer can be reached at aswoyer@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.