Trump is facing revised 2020 election meddling charges.
US prosecutors have re-filed charges against former President Donald Trump for alleged attempts to intervene in the 2020 election after he lost to Joe Biden.
They are in response to a US Supreme Court decision last month, which stated that presidents have extensive protection from criminal prosecution for official activities while in office.
The amended indictment includes the same four criminal accusations against Trump, which he rejects, but they now refer to his role as a political candidate rather than a serving president.
It looks doubtful that the case, as well as other criminal cases brought against the Republican, will be heard before this year’s election on November 5.
In addition to dismissing charges of electoral tampering, Trump has continued to claim—without evidence—that significant voting fraud occurred in the 2020 election.
The revised indictment, filed by Department of Justice Special Counsel Jack Smith, maintains the four crimes Trump is accused of committing: conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, attempting to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights.
Trump has already pleaded not guilty to all allegations.
Todd Blanche, the former president’s personal lawyer, sent the BBC to the Trump campaign, which did not return a request for comment.
In a post on Truth Social, Trump claimed that the new charge was “an effort to resurrect a ‘dead’ witch hunt” and “distract the American people” from the election.
He demanded that it be “dismissed IMMEDIATELY”.
A source close to Trump’s legal team told CBS News, the BBC’s US partner, that the fresh indictment “was not a surprise.”.
“This is what the government is supposed to do based on what the Supreme Court did,” a source told me. “It doesn’t change our position that we believe Smith’s case is flawed and it should be dismissed.”
The amended charging sheet, which was reduced from 45 to 36 pages, reworks the phrasing of the claims and refines how it argues that the former president committed these crimes in accordance with the Supreme Court’s rule on presidential immunity.
For example, the amended indictment excludes the allegation that Trump attempted to compel Justice Department officials to act to reverse his defeat. The Supreme Court found that Trump’s directive to justice officials was not illegal.
The special counsel’s office outlined its reasoning in a statement.
It stated that the superseding indictment had been given to a new grand jury, which had not previously heard evidence in the case.
A prosecutor convenes a grand jury to evaluate whether there is sufficient evidence to proceed with a prosecution.
The Justice Department declined to comment further.
What exactly does a grand jury do?
According to the new charging sheet, Trump engaged in the alleged conspiracy to impact the election as a private man rather than as president.
“The defendant had no official responsibilities related to the certification proceeding, but he did have a personal interest as a candidate in being named the winner of the election,” according to a newly added section in the indictment.
Another new phrase references a lawsuit filed by his campaign in Georgia. The prior phrasing stated that the action was “filed in his name,” but the revised indictment says it was “filed in his capacity as a presidential candidate.”
According to prosecutors, the new indictment appears to have dropped allegations against Jeffrey Clark, a former Justice Department officer who played a crucial role in the alleged phony electors plot.
The phony electors plot was an attempt to meddle in the Electoral College system, which decides presidential elections. It centered on an attempt to persuade Republican-controlled state legislatures in seven states to select Republican electors or not nominate any electors in states won by Mr. Biden.
The counterfeit certificates were subsequently delivered to the US Senate in an attempt to have their votes counted in place of the legitimate electors, overturning Mr. Biden’s victory.
Mr. Clark was not named in any charge, but he has been identified by the media using public records.
The latest indictment upholds numerous significant charges against Trump, including his attempt to persuade Vice President Mike Pence to obstruct Mr. Biden’s election certification.
In last month’s Supreme Court verdict, Chief Justice John Roberts stated that any communications between Trump and Pence would most likely be considered official acts.
“Trump is at least presumptively immune from prosecution,” he said, adding that it remained to be seen whether the government can disprove “that presumption of immunity.”.
According to Daniel Charles Richman, a constitutional law scholar at Columbia Law School, the fresh indictment demonstrates that Mr. Smith viewed the US Supreme Court’s decision to suggest that his case could still proceed.However, whether it would satisfy the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity framework is questionable, according to the law expert, as “the Court was painfully vague as to what private conduct done by a president can be charged criminally.”
Mr. Richman told the BBC that the fresh indictment would not necessarily speed the process. He questioned whether it would be heard before the election.
According to a CBS News source close to Trump’s legal team, the former president’s lawyers would seek additional time to prepare for the case. They stated that if the judge agrees, the trial will most certainly be delayed.
This case came together when Mr. Smith was appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland in 2022 to oversee two federal investigations investigating Trump: the election interference case and another accusing the ex-president of returning confidential papers to his Florida home after he left office.
On Monday, Mr. Smith’s team filed an appeal against a Florida judge’s decision to reject the private documents lawsuit.
“The district court deviated from binding Supreme Court precedent, misconstrued the statutes that authorised the special counsel’s appointment, and took inadequate account of the longstanding history of Attorney General appointments of special counsels,” the team representing the special counsel wrote in its petition for review.
Both cases have uncertain fates following the Supreme Court’s momentous decision last month.
If Trump defeats Democrat Kamala Harris, he is generally likely to order the Justice Department to drop all of the criminal charges against him.
