The Supreme Court has declined the request by Special Counsel Jack Smith to fast-track the legal proceedings against former President Donald Trump. CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig pointed out a critical aspect of Smith’s approach.
Honig noted that Smith’s reluctance to openly admit his intention to conclude the case before the 2024 election might be seen as adhering to DOJ policy. “I can’t speak for why Jack Smith refuses to state that he wants to get this in before the election, although that’s quite clearly the case,” he said.
“I think any fair-minded observer understand that’s exactly why he’s pushing so hard. But he refuses to say it because it would be contrary to DOJ policy to say, ‘I’m taking actions with the election in mind.'”
The Supreme Court’s decision not to expedite the case reflects upon the arguments presented by Smith. Despite recognizing the case’s significance, the Court found the justification for expedited proceedings insufficient. Honig said that Smith’s failure to assert a “need for speed” for of the upcoming election led to a reliance on generalities, which ultimately did not persuade the Court.
The decision now moves the case to the Court of Appeals, and possibly later to the Supreme Court, ensuring a delay in the proceedings. The delay is crucial as it suggests that the case against Trump will not be resolved before the upcoming presidential election, a timeline that many speculate was Smith’s original intention.
BREAKING: Supreme Court Rejects Jack Smith’s Request For Expedited Review Of Case Against Trump.
The Court’s decision, delivered on Friday, effectively denies the petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment in the case.
The ruling comes as a pivotal moment in the ongoing… pic.twitter.com/7rHoyz6Sy2
— TP Breaking Alerts (@tpbreaking) December 22, 2023
On December 11, Smith filed the motion to the Supreme Court, seeking a swift resolution to the case involving four counts against Trump, including conspiracy to defraud the United States and obstruction of an official proceeding. Critics, notably among Trump’s base, often described the indictment as baseless and politically charged.
Smith’s request to bypass the appeals court and directly engage the Supreme Court was seen as an aggressive strategy. However, the latest decision by the Court will delay the proceedings, initially scheduled to begin on March 4, 2024. The delay might push the case beyond the upcoming presidential election, which could impact its political ramifications. The decision by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals can still be appealed by both parties to the higher court. However, this development represents a significant win for Trump.
The Supreme Court just rejected Jack Smith’s attempt to rig an election and bypass normal procedure and the appellate court regarding my father’s challenge to the fake insurrection January 6 indictments!!!!#Trump2024
— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) December 22, 2023
The refusal of the Supreme Court to fast-track the case is open to various interpretations. On one hand, it denies Smith the urgency he sought in resolving the legal matters surrounding Trump. On the other, it could be perceived as a setback for those seeking immediate legal action against the former President.
The Court’s decision could inadvertently aid Trump’s legal and political standing as well. If the Supreme Court had agreed to an expedited review and ruled in favor of Trump, particularly on the grounds of presidential immunity, it would have been a significant legal victory for him with the presidential election looming.
The indictment includes serious charges, but the legitimacy and political motivations behind these charges have been hotly debated.