Donald Trump wants classified documents trial delayed until after 2024 election
The trial is currently scheduled for 14 August, but prosecutors from special counsel Jack Smith’s office have already requested that it be pushed back to 11 December
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Donald Trump is now seeking to have his federal criminal trial delayed until after the 2024 election, citing his status as a candidate for president and other legal arguments which experts say lack any grounding in actual law.
In a court filing in Miami late on Monday, Mr Trump’s lawyers asked the judge to indefinitely delay his trial on charges over his handling of classified documents, saying that due to the extraordinary nature of the case it would not be possible to try it before the presidential election.
In the 12-page filing, they called the government’s case against him “extraordinary” and claim it “presents a serious challenge to both the fact and perception of our American democracy” because Mr Trump is seeking his party’s nomination to run against the incumbent president who defeated him in 2020, Joe Biden.
“The Court now presides over a prosecution advanced by the administration of a sitting President against his chief political rival, himself a leading candidate for the Presidency of the United States. Therefore, a measured consideration and timeline that allows for a careful and complete review of the procedures that led to this indictment and the unprecedented legal issues presented herein best serves the interests of the Defendants and the public,” they said.
While prosecutors had asked Judge Aileen Cannon to set a trial date of 11 December, the former president has opposed that request on the grounds that to “begin a trial of this magnitude within six months of indictment is unreasonable, telling, and would result in a miscarriage of justice” for him and his co-defendant, longtime aide Walt Nauta.
In a brief order issued shortly after Mr Trump’s arraignment last month, Judge Cannon set a trial date for 14 August, but Special Counsel Jack Smith later asked for the four-month delay the ex-president and his co-defendant now oppose.
Instead, Mr Trump is seeking an indefinite delay to the proceedings against him.
“Based on the extraordinary nature of this action, there is most assuredly no reason for any expedited trial, and the ends of justice are best served by a continuance,” his attorneys wrote in Monday’s filing.
“The Court should, respectfully, before establishing any trial date, allow time for development of further clarity as to the full nature and scope of the motions that will be filed, a better understanding of a realistic discovery and pre-trial timeline, and the completion of the security clearance process,” they said, adding later that the trial should also be delayed because Mr Trump’s presidential campaign “requires a tremendous amount of time and energy,” and makes trial preparation too difficult.
Mr Trump’s attorneys also say that the case poses “significant” legal questions that could see the case dismissed long before trial, and suggest in their filing that they plan to argue that Mr Trump declassified the documents at issue, challenge the constitutionality of the Classified Information Procedures Act — the law used to allow classified evidence in criminal trials — and they further suggest that it would be impossible to select an impartial jury during the 2024 election.
“Proceeding to trial during the pendency of a Presidential election cycle wherein opposing candidates are effectively (if not literally) directly adverse to one another in this action will create extraordinary challenges in the jury selection process and limit the Defendants’ ability to secure a fair and impartial adjudication,” they said, citing a Justice Department policy that “cautions against taking prosecutorial action for the purpose of affecting an election or helping a candidate or party” even though that policy pertains only to investigations and indictments, not the conduct of criminal cases that have already been brought.
The ex-president’s lawyers later suggested that they intend to repeat baseless legal claims Mr Trump has advanced on his Truth Social page, namely the argument that under the Presidential Records Act and a 2012 court precedent regarding tapes belonging to former president Bill Clinton, he had the right to keep the documents at issue in this case.
“Contrary to the Government’s assertion regarding the nature of the legal issues in this matter ... this case presents novel, complex, and unique legal issues, most of which are matters of first impression. As noted above, this Court will need to evaluate the intersection between the Presidential Records Act ... and the various criminal statutes forming the basis of the indictment. These will be questions of first impression for any court in the United States, and their resolution will impact the necessity, scope, and timing of any trial,” they said.
Continuing, they also said they plan to challenge the constitutionality of the Espionage Act under which Mr Trump is being prosecuted, as well as Mr Smith’s ability to indict a former president.
Mr Smith’s office has not yet responded to the filing.
Last month, Mr Trump was indicted on 37 federal charges over his handling of classified documents, including national defence information, after leaving the White House.
The indictment, which was unsealed on Friday (9 June), alleges that Mr Trump deliberately lied to and misled authorities so that he could hold onto documents that he knew were classified.
On at least two separate occasions, Mr Trump then showed some of the classified documents to people not authorised to see them, the indictment alleges.
Stunning photos revealed that many of the documents were stored around a toilet, shower and ballroom at his Mar-a-Lago estate.
The charges include 31 counts of willful retention of national defense information and single counts of false statements and representations, and counts of conspiracy to obstruct justice, withholding a document or record, corruptly concealing a document, concealing a document in a federal investigation and a scheme to conceal.
He pleaded not guilty to the charges at his arraignment in a Miami federal courthouse, becoming the first current or former US president ever charged with a federal crime.
Mr Trump’s longtime aide Walt Nauta was also charged with six obstruction- and concealment-related charges after he allegedly helped move boxes of documents from Mar-a-Lago to Mr Trump’s residence and then lied to investigators about having any knowledge of the handling of the papers.
The two men appeared in court together but Mr Nauta did not enter a plea as he did not have legal counsel in Florida.
Mr Nauta appeared for his arraignment last week where he pleaded not guilty.
Subscribe to Independent Premium to bookmark this article
Want to bookmark your favourite articles and stories to read or reference later? Start your Independent Premium subscription today.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments