Former President Donald Trump's lawyers have asked a federal court to dismiss the 2020 election interference case against him, a move that could signal their intent for future Supreme Court review.
Trump's counsel on Thursday submitted a filing asking United States District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who once wrote in regard to Trump that "presidents are not kings" and has handed out some of the harshest sentences to Jan. 6 Capitol riot defendants, to dismiss the charges levied by special counsel Jack Smith.
GAETZ BLASTS BIDEN IMPEACHMENT AS PART OF 'FOREVER WAR' REPUBLICANS CAN'T WIN
The former president is facing four federal felonies in the case alleging he obstructed the 2020 presidential election and is scheduled for a trial beginning March 4 in Washington, D.C. He has pleaded not guilty to all the charges.
The motion to dismiss is rife with references to Supreme Court precedent as well as apparent holes in case law that "no court" has ruled on, arguing the former Republican president, who is again seeking reelection, is immune from prosecution for actions they say were taken in his official role.
“No court has addressed whether such Presidential immunity includes immunity from criminal prosecution for the President’s official act," Trump's lawyers wrote.
The Supreme Court has held that presidents are immune from civil liability for actions related to their official duties, but the arguments by Trump's counsel hint that their target audience is not Chutkan or any judge on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals but the nation's highest court.
Multiple constitutional law experts told the Washington Examiner the motion appeared "tailored" or "designed" to cater to the Supreme Court's potential interest but expressed doubt that the justices would actually agree to consider this motion because most criminal appeals by a defendant are post-conviction, not pretrial.
"That said, if I were betting, I don't think it would work unless Trump could somehow demonstrate that he was acting in the scope of his office, as he alleges, but which fails the smell test," Andrew Lieb of Lieb at Law told the Washington Examiner.
Trump's lawyers indeed argue that he is being charged for acts that are "at the heart of his official responsibilities as President," adding that "the prosecution does not, and cannot, argue that President Trump’s efforts to ensure election integrity, and to advocate for the same, were outside the scope of his duties."
Case Western Reserve University School of Law professor Jonathan Adler was similarly skeptical about Trump's luck at the Supreme Court, saying, "I doubt" the justices would want to intervene.
"The premise is that Trump is being prosecuted for an 'official act,' and I am skeptical that any court will conclude that the actions for which he is being prosecuted are properly characterized as such," Adler said.
Trump's filing to dismiss the charges in the election obstruction case came within hours of a similar bid to dismiss his New York hush money charges brought by District Attorney Alvin Bragg and his efforts to delay his separate federal criminal trial in Florida over his alleged mishandling of classified materials after leaving office.
And if Trump can't convince any court to dismiss the charges, his lawyers on Thursday also filed a motion for a time extension on pretrial motions in Chutkan's court, another attempt to delay his trial in that case.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
"This case is the first of its kind in American history," Trump's counsel wrote. "Many, if not most, of President Trump's motions address wholly unique areas of the law that have never been litigated. To lodge these motions properly, counsel requires time to fully research and develop each issue and appraise the court of relevant authorities."
Separately in Chutkan's court, a hearing is scheduled for Oct. 16 over Smith's request to impose a limited gag order on the former president, aimed at reining in his attacks on prosecutors and potential witnesses involved in the case.