Special counsel Jack Smith has criticized President Trump’s legal team for attempting to dismiss his federal election subversion case, which cited a concurring opinion from Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Trump’s team filed a motion earlier this month, arguing that Smith’s appointment was unconstitutional, basing their claim on Thomas’s recent concurring opinion in Trump v. United States, a ruling that granted Trump limited immunity for some actions taken during his presidency.
In Trump v. United States, Thomas questioned the legality of Smith’s appointment in a concurring opinion. Subsequently, Trump-appointed U.S. District Judge Cannon dismissed the president’s federal classified documents case, similarly ruling Smith’s appointment unconstitutional, echoing Thomas’s concerns.
On Thursday, Smith responded, urging U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who presides over Trump’s election subversion case, to reject the motion on the grounds that it was filed past the deadline and that neither Thomas’s opinion nor Cannon’s ruling should impact the current case. Smith argued that Trump’s team misused Thomas’s opinion, which was not binding or relevant.
“The defendant implies that he had no basis to challenge the Special Counsel’s authority until Justice Thomas authored a concurring opinion … and the district court overseeing his criminal prosecution in the Southern District of Florida dismissed the indictment after accepting his arguments,” Smith stated. He emphasized that “neither that solo concurring opinion on a question that the parties did not brief or argue to the Supreme Court nor the unpersuasive out-of-circuit district court opinion binds this Court.”
Read Smith’s court filing here.
