DOJ suggests Trump criminal trials could take place close to the election
Cannon raised the question of whether or not a delay in the trial start would be in violation of the DOJ's "60-day rule" that prevents it from engaging in actions that could influence an election.
The government argued that it was "in full compliance with the justice manual" and that the rule did not apply to cases that have already been brought.
A lawyer for Trump argued that the key question for trial scheduling was now whether a fall trial would be "complete election interference."
Court has paused for a lunch break
Court has adjourned for one hour for lunch.
Trump lawyers cite campaign obligations and N.Y. trial as reasons for delay
The defense argued that a trial starting this year would be "unfair to Trump as a nominee for president" due to his campaign schedule. They also cited the trial in New York over alleged hush money payments as a reason for delay, saying that Trump planned to be there nearly every day (criminal defendants are normally required to attend all trial dates).
What is an evidentiary hearing?
Trump's attorneys are asking for the trial to be delayed until after an evidentiary hearing in August.
An evidentiary hearing is when the court hears what evidence prosecutors have on a specific topic and determines what evidence will be allowed to be presented at trial.
It's unclear so far what evidence Trump's team was asking to be reviewed at the hearing Friday, but in a court filing Thursday they indicated they wanted numerous evidentiary hearings on their motions to suppress information from the FBI's search of Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort, and to compel the government to turn over any evidence related to their claims of selective and vindictive prosecution, and on prosecutorial misconduct. They also asked for another on their claim that Trump's actions were protected under the Presidential Records Act.
Trump's attorneys told the judge they thought the hearing would take more than a day. Smith's team told the judge it doesn't think an evidentiary hearing is necessary.
Lawyers for Trump argue that summer trial date is 'unfair' and 'an impossibility'
In response to the prosecution's proposed start date of July 8, defense attorneys argued that holding the trial before the election is "unfair" and that the July date is "an impossibility for the defendant" due to the New York criminal case beginning March 25. They proposed evidentiary hearings beginning in August.
Federal prosecutors and Trump attorneys propose new trial dates in classified documents case
Attorneys for special counsel Jack Smith and Trump proposed new trial dates Thursday for the former president’s criminal trial on charges that he mishandled classified documents and national security secrets.
Federal prosecutors proposed a July 8 start date, while attorneys for Trump suggested he stand trial on Aug. 12. Trump’s proposed date was a surprise because he and his attorneys have maintained that the trial should be held after the presidential election in November.
Cannon had asked both sides to propose a schedule ahead of a hearing on the issue in Fort Pierce, Florida, on Friday. The case was initially scheduled to go to trial in May, but it’s been expected that the original start date would be pushed back because of a number of outstanding legal issues that have yet to be decided by the court.
Trump arrives at courthouse
Trump has arrived at the courthouse in Fort Pierce, Florida.
Nikki Haley calls for all Trump legal cases to be ‘dealt with’ before November
Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley said that all of former President Donald Trump‘s legal cases should be “dealt with” before the presidential election.
“I think all of the cases should be dealt with before November,” Haley said yesterday in an interview with NBC News’ “Meet the Press“ moderator Kristen Welker in Falls Church, Virginia, where voters will cast their primary ballots Tuesday.
“We need to know what’s going to happen before it, before the presidency happens, because after that, should he become president, I don’t think any of it’s going to get heard,” she continued.
Haley spoke a day after the Supreme Court agreed to decide whether Trump could claim presidential immunity in response to criminal charges. It could take months for the high court to reach a decision, pushing back the potential timeline for his election interference trial.
“I just think a president has to live according to the laws, too. You don’t get complete immunity,” she said, addressing the Supreme Court’s decision to take the case. She added that presidents should not get “free rein to do whatever they want to do.”
Highlights from the documents case so far
- Trump, his aide Walt Nauta and Mar-a-Lago property manager Carlos Oliveira were charged last summer in a superseding indictment in the case by special counsel Jack Smith. They also pleaded not guilty.
- Trump is facing 40 criminal charges in the case, including willful retention of national defense information, false statements and representations, conspiracy to obstruct justice, and corruptly concealing documents.
- Lawyers for the former president recently filed motions to get the case tossed, citing Trump's claims of presidential immunity even though the alleged crimes happened after he served in the White House.
- Federal officials from a U.S. attorney's office were recently investigating online threats that a potential government witness in the case received.
Judge to hold critical hearing that could postpone trial in Trump classified documents case
The federal judge overseeing the classified documents case against Trump will hold a key hearing in Florida today as she considers pushing back the trial date of May 20.
The hearing is set to begin in Fort Pierce at 10 a.m. ET and should last most of the day. The judge, Aileen Cannon, has left several issues about how to proceed with the documents case unresolved. Trump is expected to attend the hearing.
In filings last night that had been requested by Cannon, special counsel Jack Smith’s office suggested pushing the trial back to July 8, while Trump’s lawyers proposed an Aug. 12 start date. Trump’s attorneys also made clear that they believe the trial should be pushed back until after November’s election.
“As the leading candidate in the 2024 election, President Trump strongly asserts that a fair trial cannot be conducted this year in a manner consistent with the Constitution, which affords President Trump a Sixth Amendment right to be present and to participate in these proceedings” and “a First Amendment right that he shares with the American people to engage in campaign speech,” they wrote.
Both sides also submitted a lengthy joint proposal for a questionnaire for potential jurors, but there were some areas among the 99 questions where they did not agree, including how long the trial will take. Smith’s office estimated four to six weeks, while Trump’s team put it at eight to 10 weeks. Smith’s team also wants to ask potential jurors if they believe the 2020 election was stolen; Trump’s side wants to know whether they voted that year.