Jack Smith’s Federal Election Interference Trial Comes Back to Life

Donald Trump has been convicted of 34 felony counts in the New York hush money case—but there’s a lengthy appeals process ahead. And what ever happened to the other three cases against him—Jack Smith’s federal election interference and classified documents cases, and Fani Willis’ Georgia election interference case? All three have hit various roadblocks. To make it easier to follow all of Trump’s ongoing legal entanglements, each Monday, we’ll keep you updated on the latest developments in Keeping Up With the Trump Trials. 

Donald Trump will not be sentenced for his 34 felony counts in the New York hush money case before November’s presidential election, the judge in that case announced on Friday. Over in D.C., the judge in special counsel Jack Smith’s election interference case issued a jam-packed court schedule, indicating she has no plans to slow things down because of the presidential election. Meanwhile, Trump’s appeal began in the New York civil case that found him liable for sexual abuse.

Last week, special counsel Jack Smith’s election interference case came back to life. Nine months after Judge Tanya Chutkan put the trial proceedings on pause while Trump pursued his presidential immunity appeal, the judge held a much-anticipated hearing and issued a schedule that suggests she intends to resolve this case as quickly as possible.

During the hearing, the prosecution and defense argued about how the judge should proceed in light of the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision, which could potentially mean that conversations he had with his vice president are considered “official” acts and are not admissible as evidence. First and foremost, the prosecution wanted Chutkan to resolve outstanding questions on what elements, if any, of the special counsel’s superseding indictment are affected by the Supreme Court’s decision. If Chutkan doesn’t make decisions about the immunity issue up front, Smith’s team argued, then the defense will inevitably appeal her final decision on immunity grounds, potentially forcing the case back to the Supreme Court.

Trump’s lawyers vehemently opposed that approach, arguing that Smith’s plan would be “enormously prejudicial to President Trump.” They also insisted that between now and November would be a “sensitive time” for Trump because of his ongoing presidential campaign, though Chutkan plainly rejected that. “I am definitely not getting drawn into electoral disputes. … That’s not something I’m going to consider,” she said.

Hours after the hearing, Chutkan released her schedule, and it seems she plans to grant Smith’s wish. The judge issued a Sept. 26 deadline for the special counsel to submit an “opening brief” of evidence he intends to use to prove his charges against Trump. The former president’s defense team will be able to respond in October and include their own evidence. Chutkan is also allowing Trump to challenge Smith’s appointment as special counsel, a strategy that convinced Judge Aileen Cannon to dismiss Smith’s classified documents case. Most of Chutkan’s filing deadlines are scattered between now and Nov. 7.

Ever since May, when a jury convicted Trump of 34 felony counts for covering up hush money payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels in the run-up to the 2016 election, the former president’s attorneys have been trying everything they could think of to delay his sentencing. It seems to have worked: Last Friday, New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan announced he was delaying Trump’s sentencing for the second time. Now it’s set for Nov. 26—three weeks after voters decide who the next president will be.

Merchan acknowledged that the current situation with Trump is “fraught with complexities rendering the requirements of a sentencing hearing, should one be necessary, difficult to execute.” The judge had initially scheduled Trump’s sentencing for July 11, but 10 days before that, the Supreme Court issued its bombshell presidential immunity decision. Merchan was forced to push the sentencing to Sept. 18, but Trump’s attorneys requested another delay, since they are also appealing Trump’s conviction under presidential immunity grounds.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg signaled he didn’t oppose another delay, telling Merchan he would defer to the judge’s best judgment on the matter. Merchan ultimately ceded to Trump’s request, but he did so while emphasizing the importance of maintaining the integrity of the judicial system, since Trump’s Sept. 18 sentencing would be within “approximately 41 days of the 2024 presidential election.”

Amid his busy campaign schedule, the former president took time to attend an appeals court hearing in New York City last week where his attorneys challenged the decision in a civil trial that found Trump liable for defamation and sexual abuse, awarding  E. Jean Carroll $5 million in damages.

The hearing focused on the nitty-gritty details of evidence used during trial, including the testimony of Jessica Leeds, a woman who alleged Trump groped her on an airplane back in the 1970s. The infamous Access Hollywood tape was also debated, with Roberta Kaplan, Carroll’s attorney, acknowledging it should have been admitted as more of a personal confession than used as a way to show a pattern of behavior. However, Trump did not take the stand during trial and that, Kaplan argued, made the tape fair game to use.

At the end of the hearing, Trump spoke to reporters outside the courtroom and went on a tirade against Carroll, repeating the very claims the jury found defamatory—that he “never met her,” “never touched her,” and that her sexual abuse claims were “fabricated.”

Flanked by his attorneys who are representing him in his various legal battles, the former president also said, “I’m disappointed in my legal talent.”