Prosecutors Ask Supreme Court to Reject Trump’s Immunity Claim in Election Case

Garland’s Careful Approach Trump’s Immunity Claim Trump’s 2020 Pressure Campaign Trump Case Tracker U.S. World Business Arts Lifestyle Opinion Audio Games Cooking Wirecutter The Athletic You have a preview view of this article while we are checking your access. When we have confirmed access, the full article content will load. Garland’s Careful Approach Trump’s Immunity […]

Prosecutors Ask Supreme Court to Reject Trump’s Immunity Claim in Election Case

Prosecutors Ask Supreme Court to Reject Trump’s Immunity Claim in Election Case thumbnail

You have a preview view of this article while we are checking your access. When we have confirmed access, the full article content will load.

The filing was the main submission from Jack Smith, the special counsel prosecuting the former president. The case will be argued on April 25.

The Supreme Court, as seen from the steps in front of it.
“A bedrock principle of our constitutional order,” the special counsel told the Supreme Court in a filing, “is that no person is above the law — including the president.” Credit…Kent Nishimura for The New York Times

Adam Liptak

Jack Smith, the special counsel prosecuting former President Donald J. Trump on charges of plotting to overturn the 2020 election, urged the Supreme Court on Monday to reject Mr. Trump’s claim that he is immune from prosecution.

“The president’s constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed does not entail a general right to violate them,” Mr. Smith wrote.

The filing was Mr. Smith’s main submission in the case, which will be argued on April 25.

He wrote that the novelty of the case underscored its gravity.

“The absence of any prosecutions of former presidents until this case does not reflect the understanding that presidents are immune from criminal liability,” Mr. Smith wrote. “It instead underscores the unprecedented nature of petitioner’s alleged conduct.”

He urged the justices not to lose sight of the basic legal terrain.

“A bedrock principle of our constitutional order,” he wrote, “is that no person is above the law — including the president.” He added, “The Constitution does not give a president the power to conspire to defraud the United States in the certification of presidential-election results, obstruct proceedings for doing so or deprive voters of the effect of their votes.”

Mr. Smith urged the court to move quickly, though he did not directly address the pending election.

When the Supreme Court said in February that it would hear the case, it set what it called an expedited schedule. But it was not particularly fast, with oral arguments scheduled about seven weeks later. That delay was a significant partial victory for Mr. Trump, whose trial had been expected to start March 4.


Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.


Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber? Log in.

Want all of The Times? Subscribe.