Trump Says DOJ Violating Order in Continuing a Paused Case

‘The prosecution has improperly and unlawfully attempted to advance this case by serving thousands of pages of additional discovery.’

Special counsel Jack Smith (L). (Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images) / Former President Donald Trump. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times

Former President Donald Trump’s legal team revealed that special counsel Jack Smith’s office has pushed forward with pretrial proceedings even after a judge stayed, or paused, all case proceedings and deadlines.

“Over the last two days, the prosecution has improperly and unlawfully attempted to advance this case by serving thousands of pages of additional discovery, as well as a purported ‘Draft Exhibit List,’” a Dec. 18 court filing reads.

“These actions, the prosecution admits, are calculated to ‘help ensure that [a potential] trial proceeds promptly if and when the mandate returns.’”

On Dec. 17, the special counsel notified the defense that it would be supplying additional discovery materials, and delivered the exhibit list on Dec. 18 even though U.S. District Judge for the District of Columbia Tanya Chutkan paused the election interference case on Dec. 13.

Defense lawyers emailed prosecutors on Dec. 18 asking them to refrain from further productions.

“If the prosecution continues to violate the Stay Order, we will seek appropriate relief,” the email reads.

Despite the stay, prosecutors have argued repeatedly that it is in the public interest to go to trial quickly and stick to the initially ordered March 4, 2024 date.

After President Trump brought his case into the U.S. District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by appealing Judge Chutkan’s rejection of his motion to dismiss based on presidential immunity, the prosecutors quickly followed with a request that the appeal be heard on an expedited basis.

Dueling Filings

The appeals court agreed to the request the same day that President Trump and the special counsel filed opposing arguments, ordering the appellants to file their opening brief by Dec. 23.

A hearing in the appeals court has already been scheduled for Jan. 9, 2024.

The prosecutors had also filed a petition for immediate review with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the high court to answer whether a former president can be tried for crimes committed while in office.

Defense attorneys wrote in the appeals court filing that prosecutors have misframed their defense, which argues that President Trump took the actions alleged in the indictment as official acts of duty.

Amid all this, Judge Chutkan paused district court decisions pending a resolution of the appeal. The appeals court also recently noted that it would not finalize its decision until the U.S. Supreme Court has issued its opinion.

Yet prosecutors have continued with discovery obligations in the original case—which the defense hopes to dismiss entirely—arguing that it is in the interest of the original timeline.

“Such maneuvers are exactly what the Stay Order forbids, and impose a significant and prohibited burden on President Trump,” the new filing reads. “As the Court has recognized, this case may not proceed in absentia, but rather must stop.”

“President Trump has an incontrovertible and inviolable right to be free from the burdens of this litigation during his appeal ... neither he nor counsel will review the prosecution’s unlawful productions until and unless the Court lifts the Stay Order.”

Trial Delay Likely

Judge Chutkan had written in her order that the original deadlines she set were paused, not vacated, meaning that if the case were to pick up again in the district court she would try to stick to the original schedule and pursue a March 4 trial as closely as possible.

But the current pause almost certainly will prevent the trial from beginning on March 4, because it would drastically shorten the pretrial schedule.

The March 4 date has featured prominently in the prosecutors’ recent requests in three courts, but the defense argued that they have not shown why this trial date—the day before the Super Tuesday primary elections—is so important.

The defense has argued that the prosecutors’ insistence on March 4 reveals the political nature of the prosecution.

The motion to dismiss based on presidential immunity was only one of four attempts to dismiss the case filed by President Trump’s team. They also have argued to dismiss the case based on “vindictive and selective prosecution,” and may bring this also to the appeals court.

In the Dec. 18 email that defense attorneys sent to the special counsel’s office warning them against continuing the trial in President Trump’s absence, they accused the prosecutors of “wish[ing] to rush this case to an early and unconstitutional trial in hopes of undermining President Trump’s commanding lead in the upcoming Presidential election.”

Several of the latest court filings in the district court by President Trump have strongly accused the prosecutors of election interference, arguing that this is a politically motivated case brought by the Biden administration against his chief political rival in the 2024 race.

In the email, defense attorneys admitted that they did look at the exhibit list sent over by the prosecutors and found that “the prosecution possessed at least some of the identified materials before filing the indictment.”

“To the extent the prosecution withheld such materials for strategic or other improper purposes, we will address this issue with the Court in the event the Stay Order is one day lifted,” the email reads.