Federal prosecutors are pushing back on former President Donald Trump’s claims that the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith violated the Constitution in the classified documents case. They argue that the Attorney General validly appointed the Special Counsel and that this practice has been a tradition for over 150 years. The prosecutors cite the Supreme Court’s ruling in US v. Nixon to support their argument. The District Court judge, appointed by Trump, had dismissed the indictment based on the Constitution’s appointments and appropriations clauses, but Smith’s team contends that this decision deviates from legal precedent and would have far-reaching implications on government appointments if upheld.
Trump and his allies have sought to dismiss or delay court proceedings in the indictments he faces until after the general election in November. Trump has pleaded not guilty to charges related to national defense information retention and directing the deletion of security video at his Mar-a-Lago resort. He also sought to delay the sentencing hearing in his hush money case. The appeals process in the federal election case and the delay in the Georgia election results case have ensured that trials won’t begin before Election Day. Trump’s team continues to frame these legal battles as political attacks and interference in the upcoming election, seeking to have the cases dismissed.
Photo credit
www.nbcnews.com