Your final edition of Keeping Up With the Trump Trials.
This will be Slate’s final edition of Keeping Up With the Trump Trials. You can read our old coverage of Trump’s legal entanglements here.
Donald Trump has been reelected, and he’s set to become the 47th president of the United States in January. Now all of the criminal proceedings against him are winding down, since Department of Justice policy prohibits the prosecution of a sitting president. Special counsel Jack Smith filed a motion Friday requesting that all deadlines in his Jan. 6 case be vacated while he decides his next move, and Judge Tanya Chutkan has granted it. Meanwhile, the fate of Trump’s sentencing in the New York hush money trial remains uncertain.
In 2023 Trump racked up over 80 felony charges across four criminal indictments: Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s hush money case, Smith’s classified-documents and Jan. 6 cases, and Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’ election-interference case. From the get go, Trump’s defense attorneys aggressively engaged in delay tactics to force prosecutors to slow their investigations and prevent Trump from facing a jury trial as he ran as the Republican nominee for president for the third time.
These delay tactics managed to slow both federal cases and Willis’ Georgia case, which became mired in scandal after the defense exposed a romantic relationship Willis had had with one of her prosecutors. The hush money case, however, did go to trial earlier this year, and Trump was convicted of 34 felony counts. But his biggest legal win came from the Supreme Court, when it ruled that U.S. presidents are immune from criminal prosecution for certain “official” acts committed while in office.
I spoke with Dennis Fan, a former federal prosecutor and a professor at Columbia Law, who explained how prosecutors could navigate the end of their cases while Trump prepares to become the next commander in chief.
The Federal Jan. 6 Case
At the end of 2023, Judge Tanya Chutkan paused Jack Smith’s election interference case while the Supreme Court considered Trump’s presidential-immunity appeal—and it remained paused for two months after the court released its decision, while Smith considered how to amend the charges in his indictment. On Friday, Smith requested that Chutkan vacate the remaining pretrial deadlines “to afford the Government time to assess this unprecedented circumstance and determine the appropriate course going forward consistent with Department of Justice policy.” Chutkan almost immediately granted Smith’s request.
Smith will officially announce what he plans to do with this case by Dec. 2, though DOJ policy states that sitting presidents cannot be prosecuted, since it “would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.” This means that Smith may decide to drop his case against Trump, and even step down as special counsel before Trump takes office.
Technically, the special counsel could keep the case going through the end of this year, since “that authority doesn’t disappear once there’s a change in administration,” Fan said, but Smith’s latest motion indicates he is likely not considering this route. Special counsels typically create a report toward the end of their investigation that sums up their findings and their recommendations of what to do next. Special counsel Robert Mueller famously did this in 2019, after investigating the Trump campaign’s alleged links to Russian attempts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. (Former Attorney General Bill Barr chose not to pursue charges.) Smith could hand his report to the next attorney general, who would then decide what to do about the special counsel’s open case—and Trump’s next AG would almost certainly choose to dismiss it.
The Federal Classified-Documents Case
Florida-based U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed this case in July, ruling that Smith’s appointment as special counsel was unlawful and that this meant he did not have the authority to prosecute Trump. Her decision came after she spent a year issuing sympathetic rulings that favored Trump.
Smith appealed Cannon’s decision to dismiss, and that appeal is currently being considered by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. Smith could continue pursuing this appeal through the end of the year—but the court may very well not move forward on it, given that Trump has been elected president again and in a few short months it’s almost certain that Smith will no longer be a special counsel. “If I were the 11th Circuit, I’d hold off on this one,” Fan said.
Smith could also cut his losses and formally rescind his appeal.
The New York Hush Money Case
This is the only criminal case against Trump that has gone to trial. In May, a jury found Trump guilty of 34 felony counts related to hush money payments he made in the lead-up to the 2016 election. New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan initially scheduled Trump’s sentencing in July, then delayed it twice, most recently until Nov. 26, to avoid the perception that he was interfering with the election.
Now Merchan has a big decision to make. Since the justice delayed sentencing once for the election, Fan believes that “the actual election of Donald Trump to the presidency would be a greater reason for him to delay the sentencing further, and I doubt Trump has any objection to that.” Merchan could push off Trump’s sentencing another four years, once he’s out of the White House and a private citizen again. (As president, Trump will not be able to vacate his felony conviction since it’s from a state court.)
Technically, Merchan could sentence Trump on Nov. 26 as scheduled, though Fan thinks that this is highly unlikely. “You’re not going to say, ‘Hey, in the next week, go complete your community service and do 500 hours between Christmas and Jan. 20,’ ” Fan said. Trump’s attorneys would also undoubtedly argue against the existing sentencing, and it’s likely going to create drawn-out litigation that takes time to resolve.
The Georgia Election-Interference Case
This case, spearheaded by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, has been tied up with drama and delays since the beginning of 2024. Earlier this year, a defendant in her case accused Willis of misconduct related to her romantic relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade, whom she had hired to work on her investigation. During a dramatic evidentiary hearing, Willis admitted to having had a romantic relationship with Wade after he was hired but denied any misconduct. A judge ultimately ruled that she could stay on the election-interference case, so long as Wade resigned, which he did. (Willis on Tuesday won her own reelection fight.)
However, Trump’s defense attorney appealed the judge’s decision, and for the past several months, the case has been paused until a Georgia appeals court makes a final ruling on Willis’ status in this case—oral arguments are scheduled for Dec. 5, and a final decision is expected in 2025. If Willis is allowed to remain on her case, she may be unable to prosecute Trump for the next four years, but she could still pursue charges against the 18 other co-defendants.
If the appeals court rules that Willis cannot remain on her case, it could be reassigned to another prosecutor, who would have to decide whether to keep it alive or drop the entire thing.
US charges man over alleged Iranian plot to kill Trump
The US government has brought charges against an Afghan national in connection with an alleged Iranian plot to assassinate Donald Trump before he was elected as the next president.
The Department of Justice on Friday unsealed an indictment against Farhad Shakeri, 51, alleging he was tasked with “providing a plan” to kill Trump.
The US government said Mr Shakeri has not been arrested and is believed to be in Iran – which described the claims as “completely baseless”.
In a criminal complaint filed in Manhattan court, prosecutors allege that an official in Iran’s Revolutionary Guard directed Mr Shakeri in September to devise a plan to surveil and kill Trump.
“The Justice Department has charged an asset of the Iranian regime who was tasked by the regime to direct a network of criminal associates to further Iran’s assassination plots against its targets, including President-elect Donald Trump,” US Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement.
The justice department also charged two others allegedly recruited to kill an American journalist who was an outspoken critic of Iran.
The other individuals were identified by the justice department as Carlisle Rivera, also known as “Pop”, 49, from Brooklyn, and Jonathon Loadholt, 36, from Staten Island.
The two appeared in court in the Southern District of New York on Thursday and are being detained pending a trial.
Iran’s foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said similar accusations of attempts to assassinate US presidents had been made in the past, which Iran denied and went on to be false.
In a statement, Mr Baghaei added that repeating such claims risked “further complicating the issues between the US and Iran”.
Trump has faced two separate alleged assassination attempts this year. In July, a gunman grazed the former president’s ear after shooting at him during a Pennsylvania rally.
Then, in September, a man was arrested for pointing a rifle at Trump who was golfing on his course in West Palm Beach.
Mr Shakeri was asked to come up with a plan to kill Trump in seven days, the indictment alleges.
According to prosecutors, Mr Shakeri told law enforcement that he did not intend to propose a scheme to kill Trump within that seven-day timeframe, so the Iranian Revolutionary Guard officials put the plan on pause.
Mr Shakeri said the Iranian government told him it would be easier to try to assassinate Trump after the election, because they believed he would lose, prosecutors said.
Prosecutors described Mr Shakeri as an Afghan national who came to the US when he was a child. He was eventually deported around 2008 after spending 14 years in prison for a robbery conviction.
Prosecutors say the 51-year-old used “a network of criminal associates”, from prison, including Mr Rivera and Mr Loadholt, to conduct surveillance on the Iranian government’s targets.
Mr Shakeri promised Mr Rivera and Mr Loadholt $100,000 to murder the American journalist, who had reported on the Iranian regime’s human rights abuses and corruption, prosecutors alleged. The journalist, who was not named, had been targeted in the past, prosecutors said.
In a post on social media Friday, Brooklyn-based journalist Masih Alinejad said the FBI had arrested two men for attempting to kill her. She said the alleged killers came to the front of her house in Brooklyn.
“I came to America to practice my First Amendment right to freedom of speech—I don’t want to die,” Ms Alinejad wrote. “I want to fight against tyranny, and I deserve to be safe.”
In addition to the American journalist and Trump, the indictment alleges the Iranian government sought to kill two Jewish American businesspeople living in New York City, who were supportive of Israel on social media.
Mr Shakeri also told prosecutors that his Iranian contacts asked him to plan a mass shooting to target Israeli tourists in Sri Lanka in October 2024, a year after the Hamas attacks on Israel.
Mr Shakeri, Mr Rivera and Mr Loadholt were all charged with murder-for-hire, which carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison. They also face counts of money laundering conspiracy – which could lead to 20 years in prison – and conspiracy to commit murder-for-hire.
Trump’s Last-Ditch Effort to Delay His Sentencing
Donald Trump has been convicted of 34 felony counts in the New York hush money case—but there’s a lengthy appeals process ahead. And what ever happened to the other three cases against him—Jack Smith’s federal election-interference and classified documents cases, and Fani Willis’ Georgia election-interference case? All three have hit various roadblocks. To make it easier to follow all of Trump’s ongoing legal entanglements, each week, we’ll keep you updated on the latest developments in Keeping Up With the Trump Trials.
Trump has been doing everything he can to avoid his upcoming sentencing in New York, with his attorneys filing a last-ditch motion last week to get the hush money case transferred to federal court. Meanwhile, special counsel Jack Smith filed a new superseding indictment that adjusts for the Supreme Court’s landmark presidential-immunity decision. A few days later, Trump’s attorneys responded by proposing a timeline for resolving the Jan. 6 federal case that extends well beyond the November election.
Trump’s Last-Ditch Effort to Delay His Sentencing
Last week, the former president’s attorneys filed a removal notice that requested that his hush money case be transferred to federal court and out of New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan’s hands, about two weeks before his scheduled sentencing on Sept. 18.
This is the second time Trump’s defense team has asked to transfer this case; a district-court judge denied its first attempt earlier this year. However, this time around, Trump’s team has the Supreme Court’s presidential-immunity decision to point to. In a 65-page notice, the lawyers argue that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case was “flawed” and that he used evidence that should not have been admissible because it’s related to “official acts” covered by presumptive immunity.
“Post-trial removal is necessary under these circumstances to afford President Trump an unbiased forum, free from local hostilities, where he can seek redress for these Constitutional violations,” write Trump’s attorneys.
Just three weeks ago, his attorneys also requested that Merchan delay Trump’s Sept. 18 sentencing. Trump has repeatedly tried and failed to get the judge to recuse himself from the hush money trial as well. On Tuesday, Bragg’s office responded to Trump’s removal request, noting that proceedings in state court can continue even as the federal courts consider the request.
The Special Counsel Files a New Indictment
The Supreme Court’s presidential-immunity decision was considered a big win for Trump, but Jack Smith isn’t giving up yet. Last week, the special counsel filed a new superseding indictment in his federal election-interference case against the former president.
The indictment raises the same four counts against Trump as the original did, including for obstruction of an official proceeding, a charge that could be affected by the Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Fischer v. United States. That decision narrowed the scope of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act—it included a section that seemed to broadly outlaw any obstruction of an official proceeding, and the justices ruled that it should apply only to interference with official documents. Smith’s determination to keep the obstruction charges indicates he’s willing to risk litigating the issue further in court.
The superseding indictment also eliminated any mention of former Trump Department of Justice official Jeffrey Clark and cut back significantly on how much it discusses former Vice President Mike Pence’s role. (Trump’s conversations with former DOJ officials and advisers are now considered “official” acts that are covered by absolute immunity and thus cannot be used as evidence, while his conversations with Pence appear to be covered by presumptive immunity.)
Over the weekend, Trump ranted about the Justice Department supposedly targeting him and mused that it had only helped his political campaign. “Whoever heard you get indicted for interfering with a presidential election where you have every right to do it, you get indicted, and your poll numbers go up?” said the former president.
Judge Tanya Chutkan has scheduled a hearing Thursday to determine the next steps in this case. Her biggest priority will be to conclude what portions of Smith’s indictment fall under core official presidential acts and what do not. In order to make those decisions, she could find that evidentiary hearings are necessary and require that witnesses testify, though Smith has reportedly been hoping to avoid this kind of minitrial.
Trump Suggests a Lengthy Court Schedule—Extending Beyond November’s Election
The special counsel and Trump’s attorneys filed a joint proposal late last week that laid out two very different timelines for Smith’s federal election-interference case. The former president also indicated that he plans to file a series of motions challenging Smith’s superseding indictment and his appointment to special counsel.
Trump’s attorneys suggested a timeline in which Chutkan considers a series of motions through the end of this year—stretching well past November’s presidential election. Their timeline would have Chutkan considering a motion to dismiss based on presidential immunity in mid-December and pretrial litigation continuing through spring and fall 2025. The defense also acknowledges Smith’s new superseding indictment, arguing that it “correspondingly requires time to review the new charging instrument as [Trump] determines what steps and procedures to undertake regarding, among other motions, his Presidential immunity defense.”
And in light of Jack Smith’s classified documents case being dismissed, Trump’s attorneys say they intend to request a similar dismissal of the election-interference case based on “the Special Counsel’s improper appointment and use of non-appropriated funds.” They also suggest that they may file another motion to dismiss based on the Fischer decision, since that narrowed the scope of the obstruction law that Smith is still using to charge Trump.
Meanwhile, Smith makes few demands, reiterating that he first and foremost wants the question of Trump’s immunity answered and would like Chutkan to deny Trump’s motion(s) to dismiss his election-interference case. Smith also makes no specific demands about when he would like this case to resume. “The government is prepared to file its open immunity brief at any time the Court deems appropriate,” he writes.
Keeping Up With the Trump Trials: Trump Officially Won’t Be Sentenced Before the Election
This is a special breaking news edition of Keeping Up With the Trump Trials.
For weeks now, it’s been up in the air whether Donald Trump’s sentencing in the hush money trial would go ahead on Sept. 18 as scheduled. On Friday, New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan officially decided that Trump’s sentencing will be postponed until Nov. 26—three weeks after the presidential election.
“Unfortunately, we are now in a place in time that is fraught with complexities rendering the requirements of a sentencing hearing, should one be necessary, difficult to execute,” Merchan wrote.
In May, a jury found the former president guilty of 34 felony counts for falsifying business records in order to cover up hush money payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels in the months leading up to the 2016 election. Merchan had initially scheduled Trump’s sentencing for July 11, but 10 days before it was set to happen, the Supreme Court issued its bombshell presidential immunity decision. Merchan bumped Trump’s sentencing to Sept. 18 to allow the defense and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg time to consider how the high court’s decision might impact the verdict. The justice was also scheduled to issue his own decision about how the Supreme Court’s immunity decision impacts the hush money case on Sept. 16.
The Supreme Court decision gave Trump’s lawyers new ammunition, and since then, they’ve done everything they could to delay the sentencing. They also tried and failed three times to remove Merchan from the case and wrote a letter to the justice arguing they would need more than two days between his Sept. 16 ruling and the sentencing itself. They also filed a motion to dismiss Trump’s criminal conviction, arguing prosecutors violated the Supreme Court’s immunity decision by having Trump’s former White House aide Hope Hicks testify in front of the jury.
Meanwhile the DA has stayed relatively quiet, telling Merchan he didn’t have a preference on whether to delay or keep Trump’s Sept. 18 sentencing date. Instead, he indicated he would defer to Merchan’s judgment on the matter. Dennis Fan, a Columbia law professor who was formerly a federal prosecutor, believes that likely played a role in Merchan’s decision to delay sentencing until after the election, on top of the complexity of sorting out the presidential immunity issue.
In his Friday decision, Merchan wrote at length about how important it is to maintain the integrity of the judicial system, noting Trump’s sentencing date was within “approximately 41 days of the 2024 presidential election.” Fan isn’t surprised at Merchan’s decision. “I think what’s driving him is a worry that people may view either a harsh or a lenient sentence as being driven by electoral considerations,” he said in an email to Slate.
If Trump wins the election on Nov. 5, it’s not clear what will happen with his Nov. 26 sentencing. But if Trump wins a second term in the White House, he will not be able to single-handedly vacate his conviction—it’s a felony conviction on state charges, and the president can only pardon those convicted of federal offenses.
HOT New:
RFK Jr. says ‘entire departments’ at FDA ‘have to go’
Former presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who is slated to hold a potentially big role in a new Trump administration, said Wednesday there are “entire departments” within the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that “have to go.”
“In some categories … there are entire departments, like the nutrition department at the FDA … that have to go, that are not doing their job, they’re not protecting our kids,” Kennedy said during an interview on MSNBC.
Kennedy endorsed President-elect Trump in August after initially running as a Democratic candidate for president, and then as an independent.
Trump’s win in the presidential race sets Kennedy up as a winner himself, who is likely to play some kind of role in health care for the Trump administration.
Kennedy last week said Trump assured him he would get a role in The White House if he won the presidential election.
“We don’t know what I’m going to do. I talked to the president about it yesterday, and he asked me what I wanted, and I said, we’re developing a proposal now,” Kennedy said during a separate interview with Fox News anchor Martha MacCallum, who asked if Kennedy is getting the job of Health and Human Services secretary.
That job would require Senate confirmation. Republicans appear likely to have a majority in the Senate of at least 52 seats, but it is unclear how easy it would be to get Kennedy confirmed. There has been plenty of speculation that Kennedy would serve in a role that does not require Senate confirmation.
Howard Lutnick, the co-chair of Trump’s transition team, recently said Kennedy is “not getting a job” as HHS leader.
When asked if he would eliminate any health agencies, Kennedy told MSNBC, “to eliminate the agencies, as long as it requires congressional approval, I wouldn’t be doing that.”
“I can get the corruption out of the agencies,” he added.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():focal(736x500:738x502)/markise-outing-mugshot-062724-f5fbe2fef26d427badb667eb5c29accd.jpg?w=1200&resize=1200,0&ssl=1 "6-Year-Old Girl Dies in Hot Car After Mom’s Boyfriend Allegedly Leaves Her in Vehicle While at Work: Police")
