Special Counsel Jack Smith took aim Thursday night at President Donald Trump’s bid to have his 2020 election case dismissed based on presidential immunity, rejecting it as unsupported by American history.
Pointing to examples such as the prosecution of the third vice president, Aaron Burr, and former President Richard Nixon’s pardon, prosecutors said in their 54-page filing that no “legal principle, case or historical practice” establishes the idea that former presidents have absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken in office. Trump’s legal team argued in a filing in early October that actions outlined in Smith’s indictment, including communicating with state lawmakers and members of Congress about election-related matters and directing the organizing of slates of electors, cannot be subject to criminal charges because they fell within Trump’s official duties.
Trump’s claim undermines the principle that “no one is above the law,” prosecutors argued. While sitting presidents have immunity from criminal prosecution, former presidents do not, even if they maintain immunity from civil liability for official conduct, prosecutors wrote.
“Throughout American history, there have been federal criminal prosecutions of high-ranking officials from all three branches of the federal government— including the Vice President, members of the Cabinet, Senators, Representatives, and judges as well as of governors, mayors, sheriffs, and more,” Smith’s team wrote. “Far from chilling public officials in the exercise of their duties, these prosecutions have helped ensure that officials and citizens alike know that ours is a system based on the rule of law, applicable without fear or favor to even the most powerful public officials.”
Prosecutors called the implications of Trump’s immunity claim “startling.”
“It would grant absolute immunity from criminal prosecution to a president who accepts a bribe in exchange for a lucrative government contract for a family member; a president who instructs his FBI Director to plant incriminating evidence on a political enemy; a president who orders the National Guard to murder his most prominent critics; or a president who sells nuclear secrets to a foreign adversary,” Smith’s team wrote.
Earlier this week, Judge Tanya Chutkan partially granted prosecutors’ request to place a gag order on Trump for the 2020 election case. Under the order, which Trump will appeal, the former president is restricted from making statements targeting Smith, his staff, witnesses, and court personnel.
All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
- Jack Smith, Fani Willis forced to defend Trump prosecutions in simultaneous testimonies - December 18, 2025
- Exclusive: Biden State Dept. appeared to ignore emails from would-be Trump assassin - December 16, 2025
- Trump DOJ seeks to block officials from testifying in Judge Boasberg probe - December 12, 2025
Comment
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.
BPR INSIDER COMMENTS
Scroll down for non-member comments or join our insider conversations by becoming a member. We'd love to have you!
