The Department of Justice says there is “no valid basis” for U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to be disqualified from presiding over Donald Trump’s federal election fraud case after the former president’s lawyers requested that she recuse herself.
Special counsel Jack Smith made a court filing late Thursday arguing that Chutkan, who is based in Washington D.C., should not be disqualified from the case.
Earlier this week, Trump’s legal team urged Chutkan to step down over what they say is her predisposed bias regarding the former president’s perceived role in the January 6 Capitol riot.
Chutkan has doled out harsh sentences to at least 38 January 6 defendants, all of whom received prison time of between five days and ten years.
She also ruled against Trump in a 2021 opinion when he sought to block his administration’s White House records from being turned over to the House January 6 Committee. “Presidents are not kings, and Plaintiff is not President,” Chutkan wrote, denying Trump had executive privilege post-presidency.
Both Chutkan’s sentencings of January 6 defendants and prior ruling against Trump, his lawyers argued, warranted her recusal from overseeing Trump’s D.C. case, which alleges he attempted to subvert the 2020 election results culminating in the riot on January 6, 2021.
“Such statements, made before this case began and without due process, are inherently disqualifying,” Trump’s attorneys wrote in Monday’s motion. “Although Judge Chutkan may genuinely intend to give President Trump a fair trial — and may believe that she can do so — her public statements unavoidably taint these proceedings, regardless of outcome.”
However, Smith and the DOJ opposed recusal.
“Although the defendant tries to claim otherwise, the Court’s statements about which he complains are core intrajudicial statements — statements that the Court made while performing its official duties, in direct response to the arguments before it, and which were derived from knowledge and experience the Court gained on the bench,” the prosecutors wrote.
“As such, to mount a successful recusal claim based on the cited statements, the defendant must show that they display a deep-seated animosity toward him,” they added. “The defendant cannot meet this heavy burden.”
Trump was arraigned in a D.C. court last month and pleaded not guilty to all four charges, including three counts of conspiracy and one count of obstruction of justice. The trial date in his election-related case is scheduled for March 4, 2024.