“He now has immunity”: Expert warns Trump can do “an awful lot” for second term without fear of prosecution

president-elect Donald Trump The expected victory on Tuesday jeopardized the lawsuits as he prepared to take office.

Trump’s federal criminal cases in Florida and Washington DC already had an uncertain fate. Special Prosecutor Jack Smith tried to revive it the first – dismissed earlier this year – on appeal to the 11th Circuit Court and charged again the latter following a Supreme Court decision on official presidential actions in June. In Georgia, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’ election interference case came to a virtual standstill as an appellate court agreed to determine whether her relationship with a former lead prosecutor disqualified her from the case. However, the president-elect’s sentencing in New York on 34 crimes is still scheduled for the end of November, following earlier delays.

Now, in the wake of his election victory, experts told Salon that Trump’s federal cases are essentially dead, and his trial in Georgia is likely to follow, while his conviction in New York will likely amount to little more than a financial blow on the wrist.

“For the most part, his ongoing legal battles will go away,” said David Schultz, a professor of legal studies and political science at Hamline University in Minnesota.

“Given that he now has immunity in Trump v. United States (Supreme Court), this potentially gives Trump the freedom to do a lot in his second term as President of the United States in ways that may have limited him. for fear of re-election, or because of possible prosecution,” he added in a telephone interview.

The charges in Trump’s federal case in Florida, which accused him of illegally withholding national security documents after leaving office and obstructing government efforts to retrieve them, were rejected in July. U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon ruled in the dismissal that Smith had been unconstitutionally appointed to oversee the case, in violation of the Constitution’s appointments and appropriations clauses. However, Smith appealed that dismissal days later to the 11th Circuit Court in an attempt to have the case reinstated.

Smith’s case against Trump in DC, accusing him of attempting to undermine President Joe Biden’s 2020 election victory and obstructing Congress’ certification of the results on January 6, 2021, was dealt a major blow in July when the Supreme Court ruled the former president was broadly immune from official actions carried out within “his core constitutional powers” while in office.

That decision shifted the task of determining which charged actions were official back to the court of U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan. Smith filed a superseding indictment against Trump in August, which upheld the same four counts, seeking to head off immunity fights by dismissing allegations about the then-president’s communications with White House officials.

Both cases will be dismissed once Trump reenters the White House, former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani said in a telephone interview. Federal prosecutors, who have long had internal guidelines against criminally charging a sitting president, will likely file motions to dismiss the case and appeal. If Smith’s office doesn’t do so, Trump could order his new pick for attorney general to fire the special counsel and end the cases that way.

“The only question is whether these cases will be dismissed in November, December or January,” Rahmani told Salon. “But Jack Smith should dismiss those cases.”

Given the federal government’s practice against criminally prosecuting a sitting president, Rahmani said he expects District Attorney Willis to take a similar approach in the Georgia case. However, Bennett Gershman, a law professor at Pace University and a former New York prosecutor, said such an outcome is unlikely.

“The Georgia case will continue to be prosecuted by Fani Willis, who was re-elected yesterday, and there is no reason to think she will leave the case,” Gershman told Salon in an email. “In fact, there is every reason to think she will move forward aggressively.”

The Fulton County district attorney charged Trump and 18 others, some of whom later accepted plea deals or had charges dropped, in a sweeping racketeering indictment last August, accusing them of conspiring to overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia to undo. The case went off the rails in the spring accusations that Willis benefited financially from her romantic relationship with a special prosecutor she hired to work the case. Although Trump’s legal team has tried to have her disqualified over the claims failedthe decision is now on appeal and the court proceedings are paused as they progress.

Schultz said he expects Trump’s legal team to request a delay in the case until after his presidency, saying Trump will be “too distracted” by his presidency to continue the prosecution once he takes office.

Rahmani added that the case cannot reasonably be stayed for the duration of Trump’s presidency because he, like any other criminal defendant, is entitled to a speedy trial. If Willis were to pursue the case, she would likely have to dismiss it and refile it later, but by then the statute of limitations for prosecution will have expired.

What comes of Trump’s criminal case in New York is more complicated because a jury has already convicted him, he said.

---

Want a daily digest of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Sign up for our morning newsletterCrash course.

---

The president-elect was convicted in May, 34 counts of falsifying business records in a plot to cover up a hush money payment to an adult film star, with his sentencing originally scheduled for mid-July at the end of a trial that featured through violations of the gag order, attacks on uninvolved parties and a shaky defense. Despite delays in his sentencing date — first pushed back to mid-September before New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan moved it again to Nov. 26 — proceedings in Trump’s criminal case will continue in New York.

Merchan said he will rule on November 12 on Trump’s proposal to vacate the guilty verdict based on the Trump v. United States decision, which also bans the introduction of evidence of official acts during criminal proceedings, according to CNN. Trump’s legal team argues that the introduction of evidence, such as Trump’s tweets during his time in office and communications with former White House aide Hope Hicks, during the New York proceeding should now be grounds for dismissal or a new trial .

“There will, of course, be strong arguments from Trump’s lawyers to delay sentencing until after Trump leaves office in four years, or to dismiss the case outright. There will be discussions about presidential immunity and the alleged impossibility of Trump serving a sentence while president. Gershman said. “But I think the arguments to postpone or drop the verdict are unfounded. Execution of the sentence will almost certainly be delayed while Trump appeals the conviction, which will be a lengthy process.”

Rahmani said he always expected Trump would ultimately avoid prison (he could be sentenced to up to four years) because his charges constituted the lowest possible crimes in New York, he has no criminal history and it would be virtually impossible to prosecute. to imprison a former person. president with Secret Service protection.

“Now that he has been elected president, that becomes even less likely,” Rahmani said. “Judge Merchan did not jail Trump for 10 complete violations of his gag order, he will not convict him at any time. He will probably get a fine and that will be the end of it.”

While Schultz agreed and raised the possibility of “little probation,” Gershman argued that Merchan could face a prison sentence of six to 24 months, citing Merchan’s sentencing of ex-Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg to five months for “conduct far less heinous than Trump’s.” Trump’s.”

When asked what he has learned from the way Trump’s various legal battles have played out in recent months, each legal expert cited several points of contention.

Gershman denounced the “repetitive legal tricks, frivolous arguments and gamesmanship” Trump’s legal team engaged in to delay his cases, and the role of the Supreme Court and Judge Cannon in “making the lawyers’ move a complete success.” Rahmani complained about the years it took Willis and Smith to file their charges, as well as Willis’ mid-case scandal.

Schultz noted Trump’s effectiveness in using the cases and procedures to his advantage in fundraising and campaigns.

“The Democrats made a big mistake by thinking that his legal troubles would be his undoing, that there would be multiple trials, that he would be convicted multiple times, or that he would become so bogged down in his criminal trials that he would ultimately not would be able to set up an effective process. campaign,” he said. “In fact, all the evidence suggests that he turned all those charges into assets.”