«The Supreme Court has been very creative in protecting MAGA misdeeds,» legal scholar says.
The Supreme Court’s lack of clarity in its presidential immunity ruling’s definition of «official» conduct leaves room for former President Donald Trump to fight the refiled indictment alleging he conspired to thwart the results of the 2020 presidential election.
On Tuesday, Special Counsel Jack Smith filed a slimmed down indictment — which he secured from a grand jury that only heard streamlined evidence.
Smith’s new indictment again includes four felony charges against Trump but excluded evidence concerning Trump’s official conduct in office, including the removal of former DOJ official Jeff Clark and his alleged efforts to place him in control of the department to pursue his election fraud claims.
Legal observers say the refiled indictment has an overall stronger chance of holding up on appeal by excluding evidence that appears to fall squarely into the Supreme Court’s definition of official conduct in last month’s ruling.
But some legal experts warn that the refiled indictment isn’t a slam dunk.
«It’s not clear whether this will work, because on appeal the Supreme Court can manipulate the category of official conduct to create a broader immunity covering other elements of the indictment», said Syracuse University law professor David Driesen, an expert in constitutional law and the author of the book “The Specter of Dictatorship: Judicial Enabling of Presidential Power.
