Following numerous setbacks, Special Counsel Jack Smith just brought up two federal crimes against President Trump. In late August, Smith filed his starting small appealing the departure of the classified documents event in Florida, and within a day, Smith subsequently filed a new accusation of President Trump in the Jan. 6 case in Washington, D. C.
In the run-up to the November election, Special Counsel Smith is aggressively pursuing these situations. But, President Trump will not experience a test in either case prior to the election.  ,
In the Manhattan “hush money” legal event, Judge Merchan delayed sentencing until Nov. 26.  ,
The most recent details about each event are provided here.
Manhattan, New York: Prosecution by DA Alvin Bragg for NDA Payment
How did we get to this point: Former president Donald Trump was charged with 34 misdemeanor counts for allegedly falsifying business information related to a non-disclosure agreement Michael Cohen’s former attorney Michael Cohen paid to sexual film actress Stormy Daniels by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who” campaigned as the best candidate to go after the original president.”
The jury returned a guilty verdict on May 30 that Trump is expected to charm. President Trump’s ability to run for president is unaffected by the faith, but it may have some challenges in terms of how well-equipped he is to do so.
Latest innovations: Judge Merchan delayed original President Trump’s punishment until Nov. 26.  , However, President Trump’s attempt to remove the circumstance to federal judge was denied by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday.  ,
Fulton County, Georgia: Prosecution by DA Fani Willis for Questioning Election Benefits
How did we get below: District Attorney Fani Willis, who charged Donald Trump with 13 criminal counts, including criminal counts, in connection with his alleged challenge to the Georgia vote results in 2020, is helming the state criminal case. While Willis ‘ event should be dismissed, the Georgia Court of Appeals is now pending.
Latest innovations: On Thursday, Judge Scott McAfee dismissed two criminal charges brought against previous president Donald Trump after she determined that Georgia state prosecutors lacked the authority to file charges for allegedly supplying fake records in federal court.  ,  ,
Southwestern District of Florida: Prosecution by Biden DOJ for Handling of Classified Records
How we got around: In this federal criminal situation, Special Counsel Jack Smith and federal prosecutors with Biden’s Justice Department , charged former President Trump in June 2023 with 40 national costs related to his reported mishandling of classified documents , at his Mar-a-Lago home. In early May, Judge Aileen Cannon postponed this trial indefinitely.  ,
On July 15,  , Judge Cannon , dismissed , the entire case because the appointment of Special Counsel Jack Smith violated the Constitution. In particular, the appointment was unlawful because of poor funding, inadequate hiring practices by the President and Senate, and a case that lacked statutory authority.  ,
Special Counsel , Jack Smith , appealed , Judge Cannon’s decision to dismiss the case. The appeal is now before the U. S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, and the special counsel’s opening brief is due August 27.  ,
Latest developments:  ,  , On Aug. 26, Special Counsel Jack Smith filed his opening brief with the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, appealing Judge Cannon’s decision to dismiss the suit in the district court. The brief contends that” [t]he Attorney General legitimately appointed the Special Counsel, who is also properly funded,” and that the district court “deviated from binding Supreme Court precedent, misinterpreted the statutes that authorized the appointment, and took inadequate account of the longstanding history of Attorney General appointments of special counsels.”
Washington, D. C.:  , Prosecution by Biden DOJ for Jan. 6 Speech
How we got here: In this federal criminal case, Special Counsel Jack Smith , charged former President Trump with four counts of conspiracy and obstruction , related to his actions on Jan. 6, 2021. The First Amendment protects President Trump’s right to raise legitimate questions about a dubious election process, according to President Trump’s attorneys, and that immunity extends to actions taken by him while acting in his official capacity. The Supreme Court was given the case.  ,
On July 1, the Supreme Court issued a major decision in , Trump v. United States , and determined that a former president is entitled” to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution” for “actions within]the President’s ] conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority”. These would be actions such as presidential pardons, vetoes of legislation, naming and managing agency officials, and recognizing foreign governments. Further, for anything else a president does that is within the “outer perimeter of the president’s official responsibilities”, there is still a presumption of immunity from criminal prosecution. A lower court will determine the extent of what falls under this “outer perimeter,” but presumptuously anything a president does acting in that capacity, rather than just a campaign capacity, could have immunity for.  ,
Following the Supreme Court’s decision on immunity, Special Counsel Jack Smith , requested a delay , until Aug. 30 to allow prosecutors time to decide next steps in this case.  , Judge Chutkan granted the delay request.  ,
Latest developments:  , On Aug. 27, Special Counsel Jack Smith revived this case by filing a new indictment against President Trump. The new indictment charged President Trump with conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, attempted obstruction and obstructing an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights. The indictment was changed to concentrate on President Trump’s political campaigning as opposed to his actual office as president. The revisions come in light of the Supreme Court’s y-ruling-further-delays-trump-trial-in-jack-smiths-d-c-lawfare/”>immunity decision, which granted “at least presumptive y-ruling-further-delays-trump-trial-in-jack-smiths-d-c-lawfare/”>immunity” for all “official acts” to sitting presidents. In light of the Supreme Court’s ruling that the statute in which these charges were filed does not intend to mean a “physical” obstruction, the case was fundamentally ignored. Judge Chutkan held a hearing on the case’s progress on September 5.  ,
New York: Lawsuit by A. G. Letitia James , for Inflating Net Worth
How we got here: Democrat Attorney General Letitia James — who , campaigned , on going after Trump — sued former President Trump alleging that he misled banks, insurers, and others about his net worth to obtain loans, although none of the parties involved claimed to have been injured.  , Following a no-jury trial,  , Judge Arthur Engoron , issued a decision , in February , ordering Trump to pay a$ 454 million penalty. Trump has appealed this decision and posted a required ,$ 175 million appeal bond.  ,
Latest developments:  , No new updates.  ,
Oliver Roberts is an associate with Holtzman Vogel Baran Torchinksy &, Josefiak PLLC, while Steve Roberts is a partner. They can be reached at sroberts @holtzmanvogel.com and oroberts @holtzmanvogel.com.
