Department of Justice special counsel Jack Smith appears to have new evidence against former President Donald Trump in his Washington, D.C. election interference case.
According to Newsweek, Smith submitted a "mystery document" to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan ahead of the September 5 hearing in the District of Columbia federal court as part of his superseding indictment of the ex-president.
The publication reported that the contents of the document were "hidden from the public and Trump's lawyers" as of Wednesday, with the new evidence under seal in accordance with federal laws pertaining to classified material.
The new document is titled "Government's Classified, Ex Parte, In Camera, and Under Seal Notice Regarding Classified Discovery," which Newsweek noted is a formal way of saying the DOJ is submitting classified information to the court that has yet to be unsealed due to national security reasons. Chutkan will review the document privately away from both the DOJ and Trump's attorneys.
READ MORE: Jack Smith to reveal new Trump evidence 'the American people do not yet know about': expert
Trump was arraigned in absentia on Wednesday on the new superseding indictment Smith previously filed. His attorneys entered a not guilty plea on his behalf, and sought to prevent further action in the case prior to the November election.
In his live-tweeting of the hearing, Politico legal correspondent Kyle Cheney observed that Trump lawyer John Lauro protested against a supposed "rush to judgment," which Chutkan laughed off, saying: "This case has been pending for over a year. We're hardly sprinting to the finish line."
The special counsel previously indicated in a joint status report filed with the defense that he would soon be submitting new evidence to the court as part of the updated indictment that included evidence against the 45th president of the United States not yet known to the public.
Smith revised the original four-count felony indictment following the Supreme Court's ruling in the Trump v. United States case, in which the conservative majority — including three Trump appointees — ruled that presidents have absolute broad immunity from criminal prosecution for all "official acts." However, the Court left it up to lower court judges like Chutkan to determine what constitutes an "official" act and what does not.
The former president's attorneys argue that Trump's actions on and leading up to January 6 took place while he was in the lame duck period of his presidency, that they are to be viewed as official acts and should be included under the Supreme Court's immunity guidelines.
Smith contended in his new superseding indictment that because Trump's January 6, 2021 rally outside the U.S. Capitol was paid for by his campaign rather than with tax dollars, it was an unofficial act of a private citizen.
READ MORE: 'Pared away all official conduct': Expert says Jack Smith's new indictment is immunity-proof
During the hearing, Chutkan said it would likely be "months" before the case went to trial. But that's assuming Trump loses the election. Should he win, he could have his appointed attorney general dismiss both ongoing federal cases against him — including both the D.C. case and the classified documents indictment in the Southern District of Florida.
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon — the Trump-appointed judge overseeing that case — dismissed the charges entirely in July, and argued in her filing that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' argument that Jack Smith was not constitutionally appointed rendered his indictment null and void. Smith appealed her decision to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, which has already overturned Cannon's rulings in the past.
Click here to read Newsweek's full report.
READ MORE: Sonia Sotomayor: Supreme Court just gave presidents power to assassinate political rivals