Legal experts believe that special counsel Jack Smith has made the federal election interference case against former President Donald Trump far stronger in his superseding indictment revealed Tuesday, as it is now compliant with the Supreme Court's ruling earlier this summer that presidents have a presumption of immunity from prosecution for official acts.
Smith, who this week also appealed the dismissal of his other case against Trump over classified documents in Florida, tweaked the charges to remove references that Trump tried to order the Justice Department to carry out corrupt acts to obstruct the election. The references couldn't be proven under the Supreme Court's ruling because they rely on evidence that is immune from review.
However, the indictment still contains most other lines of evidence that it previously had.
"On a quick read, I believe this is aimed at bringing the indictment into more conformity with the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. US — essentially by removing the bits in the previous indictment about corrupting the DOJ, which SCOTUS said were absolutely immune," wrote attorney Luppe B. Luppen, known on X as @nycsouthpaw.
"Smart," wrote national security lawyer Bradley Moss. "All of this would arguably be inadmissible now under the SCOTUS ruling. No reason to bother keeping it in."
ALSO READ: From Nixon to Trump: How the GOP has weaponized 'othering' for political gain
"Jack Smith is not going anywhere," wrote former federal prosecutor Barbara McQuade. "Here is his just-filed superseding indictment against Trump in election interference case, conforming the allegations to SCOTUS’s immunity decision."
"Jack Smith has officially filed a superseding indictment in Washington, D.C. clearing the way for the criminal charges against Trump to move forward in lieu of the recent Supreme Court decision," wrote lawyer and Democratic activist Aaron Parnas. "The Special Counsel is not messing around."
"The superseding indictment returned today in Washington reflects an effort by prosecutors to remove portions of the original indictment that would be immune from prosecution under the Supreme Court's presidential immunity ruling," wrote Lawfare's Anna Bower.
Meanwhile, Georgia State University constitutional law professor Anthony Michael Kreis believes Smith's new indictment could have impacts on another of the criminal cases against Trump.
"The Special Counsel's superseding indictment disproportionately relies on Trump's actions in Georgia for evidence of unlawful conspiracies as conduct that falls outside the scope of presidential immunity, emphasizing his status as a candidate," he wrote. "This will be an important roadmap for Judge McAfee whenever the case returns to Fulton County Superior Court and similar rulings on presidential immunity and Supremacy Clause matters have to be decided."
