Former President Donald Trump’s legal team is leveraging a recent Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity to aid his defense in the Florida case concerning the mishandling of classified documents.
In a court filing on Friday, Trump’s attorneys requested an updated schedule for the federal case, intending to present arguments related to the Supreme Court’s ruling. The team argued that the decision undermines the prosecution’s stance that Trump lacks immunity and highlights the political motives behind their claims of frivolity.
While the Supreme Court decision pertains to the 2020 election interference case in Washington, DC, it could influence all four criminal cases against Trump. Additionally, Trump’s attorneys cited Justice Clarence Thomas’s concurrence, which questions the validity of special counsel Jack Smith’s appointment, reinforcing Trump’s objections to Smith’s role and funding.
Previously, CNN reported that Trump’s team planned to use the Supreme Court’s opinion to challenge key evidence in the classified documents case. Friday’s filing marks the initial step in that direction.
This move is expected to further delay proceedings in Judge Aileen Cannon’s courtroom in Fort Pierce, Florida. Judge Cannon has not yet resolved several pretrial issues, including Trump’s request to dismiss most charges on the grounds of presidential immunity for actions taken at the end of his presidency.
Although Judge Cannon has not held a hearing on this matter, she is likely to consider the Supreme Court’s new ruling, which asserts that a president’s core constitutional powers are immune from prosecution and that other presidential actions may also require close scrutiny for potential immunity.
In a historic opinion released Monday, Justice Thomas questioned the legitimacy of the special counsel’s office, suggesting that Smith may not be a constitutionally appointed prosecutor. This issue, although not raised by Trump’s team in the DC case, was debated extensively during a recent hearing before Judge Cannon, aligning Trump’s arguments with Thomas’s stance.
Appointed by Trump, Judge Cannon showed some interest in these arguments during the hearing but has not yet issued a ruling.
