New indictment undermines ruling that Trump’s alleged crimes fall under presidential immunity

A new indictment gives supporting evidence that allegations against former president Donald Trump do not fall under presidential immunity. U.S. Justice Department Special Counsel Jack Smith said Trump attempted to interfere with the 2020 election

CBS Justice Department correspondent Robert Legare joined “Seattle’s Morning News” on KIRO Newsradio Thursday to explain the filing.

Co-host Dave Ross said from what he’s gathering, the Supreme Court’s July ruling — that former presidents have presumptive immunity for actions taken in their official role as president but are not shielded for things they do in their private capacity, as reported by The Associated Press — hasn’t changed much.

Legare said that is correct.

“The new indictment that was filed, the superseding indictment that was filed earlier in the summer, cut out a lot of allegations that the Justice Department said was immune from prosecution based on the Supreme Court’s decision,” he explained. “So what we got yesterday was a 165-page brief defending that superseding indictment, basically saying the evidence that we have collected, the information, the allegations that we included in the new superseding indictment that followed that Supreme Court decision that you mentioned, all of that should stay in the case as the case moves forward to trial.”

Background: Key passages from prosecutors’ latest court filing

Legare added that following the Supreme Court’s ruling, Smith honed in the indictment.

“What we got yesterday was in a defense of that new indictment, saying the evidence that we have now included all falls under a personal capacity of Trump the candidate, not from the president,” he said.

However, Ross asked which conduct was disqualified as a result of the Supreme Court’s decision. Legare said any conduct that occurred while Trump was president, such as conversations he had with national security advisors, national security officials, cabinet members and members of the U.S. Justice Department.

Legare added that the first indictment, over a year ago, included allegations that Trump tried to pressure officials at the Justice Department and worked with his allies in the Justice Department to pressure state officials to delay the certification of the Electoral College votes. However, that allegation, for example, is no longer in the current indictment.

Ross asked about Trump’s alleged pressuring of Georgia’s Secretary of State, which Legare said is still in the indictment.

“What we do have here, the allegations that remain, both in the superseding indictment and the new filing that came out yesterday, are Trump’s alleged efforts and those of his alleged co-conspirators to pressure state officials,” he explained.

Trump: Campaign says he raised $160 million in September, ended month with $283 million banked

Ross also questioned the status of the false electors scheme.

“Because they’re going to say, ‘These were lawyers saying that you could have this alternate slate of electors that would be standing by just in case,'” Ross said.

Legare said what Ross mentioned is going to be a defense that Trump’s attorneys will likely raise. However, Legre said before it even gets that far, “we now have this back and forth between Special Counsel Jack Smith and Trump’s defense attorneys as to whether or not any of this is going to be allowed at all into trial.

“Trump’s attorneys are likely to argue, as they have in the past, that a lot of this conduct fell within the official duty of the president in ensuring that elections are carried out fairly and accurately,” he added.

So the next step, said Ross, “is for a judge to look over the evidence that’s been disclosed today and see if the judge agrees with Jack Smith’s conclusion that these were unofficial acts as opposed to official acts.”

Legare said that is exactly right, adding the process is not going to be a quick one.

“The onus now falls on the Justice Department to overcome that presumption of immunity, but that’s going to take a lot of time for the judge to parse out,” he said. “And so that specific close call, which is central to the special counsel’s case, that is likely to be one of the main elements that gets appealed, potentially all the way to Supreme Court.”

Julia Dallas is a content editor at MyNorthwest. You can read her stories here. Follow Julia on X here and email her here.

Listen to Seattle’s Morning News with Dave Ross and Colleen O’Brien weekday mornings from 5-9 a.m. on KIRO Newsradio, 97.3 FM. Subscribe to the podcast here.