Former President Trump’s federal Jan. 6 case was back in a D.C. courtroom on Thursday with his attorneys and special counsel Jack Smith’s team arguing before U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to determine how the case should proceed.
The case was sent back to the lower court after the Supreme Court ruled Trump has broad immunity from criminal prosecution, which will now be applied to the case involving Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
Chutkan also held an arraignment on a new superseding indictment in the election subversion case that adjusted for immunity in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling. Trump plead not guilty, through his team of lawyers.
Follow below for live updates.
Hearing wraps
After roughly an hour and a half of arguing, Chutkan has ended the hearing just before 11:30 a.m.
Trump’s attorneys as well as Chutkan sparred as they tried to work out charting a path foward in the case following the Supreme Court’s immunity decision.
By the end, Chutkan said she expects the immunity decision to delay the case once more, after the parties couldn’t meet for almost one year as higher courts considered the immunity defense.
The judge, as a result, said setting a trial date would effectively be rendered useless.
Chutkan: Setting trial date ‘an exercise in futility’
Chutkan said she expects immunity “will stop these proceedings again” and said it would be “an exercise in futility” to set a trial date in Trump’s Jan. 6 case.
Indictment hinges on Pence pressure campaign, defense says
Asked by the judge, Lauro agreed that the defense’s position is that the “whole indictment falls” if Trump’s pressure campaign against Pence is found to be covered by presidential immunity.
Despite Pence’s official role as vice president, the superseding indictment retained references to Trump’s efforts to persuade Pence to certify slates of alternate electors instead of the real electors that went for President Biden in 2020.
Trump attorney cites Justice Clarence Thomas over special counsel legitimacy
Lauro pointed to a concurring opinion on immunity by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas that questioned the authority of special counsels as reason why Chutkan should allow the defense to file a motion to dismiss special counsel Jack Smith.
He said that Thomas “in effect directed us” to raise the issue, even though they initially did not because of precedent in the D.C. Circuit Court.
“I certainly don’t read it that way,” Chutkan said of Thomas’s opinion.
The deadline to file motions was in October 2022, before the case was paused as higher courts weighed presidential immunity.
Lauro also cited U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon’s decision to dismiss the former president’s federal classified documents case over Smith’s legitimacy, calling her a “very respected” judge.
Trump attorneys see Pence conversation as ‘gateway legal issue’
Lauro argued that Chutkan should first review Trump’s conversations with former Vice President Pence leading up to and on Jan. 6, calling them a “gateway legal issue” that could unwind the rest of the case.
Trump had asked Pence to buck his ceremonial duty to certify the 2020 election results on Jan. 6.
Lauro sees the conversations between the two men as immune, arguing the special counsel cannot meet the high bar of demonstrating how they were not connected to an official act.
In Lauro’s mind, that’s central to the case, saying earlier it would “crater” the indictment.
Windom said Lauro is focused on “one line” in the opinion but “not the next one” that allows those conversations to still play a broader role in the case even if Chutkan determines the Pence interactions are immune.
“It’s not an automatic dismissal of the indictment,” he said.
Trump attorney takes shot at judge
After the government responded to the defense’s proposed plan, Lauro stood up to respond again.
“Briefly,” an exasperated Chutkan said. “I don’t need any more rhetoric on how serious and grave this is.”
Lauro hit back: “It’s not rhetoric, it’s called legal argument.”
Chutkan suggests Trump lawyers are catering to campaign
The judge suggested that the plan put forth by Trump’s legal team is catered to the former president’s 2024 campaign, so that evidence is not presented in court while he vies for the White House.
“It strikes me that what you’re trying to do is affect the presentation of evidence in this case so as not to impinge on an election,” Chutkan said.
The judge said she’s “not talking about presidents of the United States,” but rather a “four-count indictment.”
Trump attorney spars with Chutkan: ‘What’s the rush?’
Lauro argued there is “something unseemly” about what he deemed “rush to judgment” in the Jan. 6 case.
“What is the rush?” Lauro asked.
Chutkan cut him off, pointedly pushing back and reminding the Trump attorney that any rulings she makes will inevitably be appealed, forcing another stay.
“This case has been pending for over a year,” she said. “We’re hardly sprinting to judgment here,” adding that there needs to be “forward motion” in the case regardless of the election’s timing.
Chutkan: 2024 election ‘not relevant here’
Chutkan acknowledged that the 2024 election is rapidly nearing but said it’s “not relevant here” as she determines how Trump’s federal election subversion case should proceed.
“This court is not concerned with the electoral schedule,” Chutkan said.
“That’s nothing I’m going to consider,” she added.
Chutkan takes issue with Trump deadlines
Chutkan pushed back on a proposed schedule from Trump’s team that would push some deadlines in the case to spring and fall of next year.
Chutkan characterized the schedule as pushing some legal battles “to a year from now.”
“Immunity needs to be deal with as soon as possible,” she said, telling Trump’s team the issue cannot be pushed too far down the calendar.
Judge should ‘scrupulously follow’ Supreme Court’s decision: Trump attorney
Sparring over next steps, Lauro told the judge he believes she should “scrupulously follow” the Supreme Court’s immunity decision in deciding how the case should proceed.
Trump’s legal team wishes to file a motion to dismiss the superseding indictment before moving forward on matters of immunity or evidence, but the judge has expressed skepticism that their proposed path forward falls in line with the justices’ ruling.
Chutkan and Lauro spar over conversations with Mike Pence
Chutkan and Lauro swiftly disagreed over how the judge should contend with Trump’s conversations with former Vice President Mike Pence.
Lauro stated that the Supreme Court was clear that the conversation with Pence are protected from prosecution – a misstatement of the court’s determination that their exchanges were presumptively immune.
“I would disagree with that,” Chutkan shot back.“They sent it back to me to figure that one out.”
Trump lawyer: Government’s plan ‘enormously prejudicial’ to Trump
Lauro told the judge that the government’s plan to file a comprehensive brief would be “enormously prejudicial” to Trump.
“I can’t imagine a more unfair protocol,” Trump’s attorney said.
He suggested that it would deny the defense an opportunity to address “evidentiary issues.”
Prosecutor lays out proposed game plan
Thomas Windom, a prosecutor with special counsel Jack Smith’s team, said that the government’s ideal next step is to submit a “comprehensive” brief detailing evidence “in and outside” the indictment that is put into the context of the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling.
The brief could include exhibits like grand jury transcripts or documentary exhibits and would explain why the government believes Trump’s conduct is “private in nature,” and therefore, not subject to immunity.
Windom said it would take three weeks to put the brief together and submit it to the court.
Judge details long-passed deadlines
Chutkan reminded the parties of the deadlines that were in place before proceedings were stayed as the immunity issue was appealed.
She said that exhibit lists had been due one week from when the pause was imposed, while questions for potential jurors were due in six weeks.
A pretrial conference was scheduled 10 weeks out from when the stay was imposed.
Those long-passed dates help establish a loose framework of what remains before Trump’s election subversion case can go to trial.
Now, the judge is tasked with reestablishing a timeline for the case – but that’s complicated by the looming 2024 presidential election.
Trump pleads not guilty to revised indictment
Speaking on Trump’s behalf, Lauro said the former president would plead not guilty to the four federal charges he faces in the case.
Lauro confirmed that Trump has reviewed the superseding indictment and understands the charges.
Judge kicks off hearing with jokes
Chutkan kicked off the hearing with a joke about how long it had been since the parties appeared in her courtroom.
“It’s been almost a year – you look rested, Mr. Lauro,” she joked to the former president’s attorney.
Lauro quipped back that “life was almost meaningless” when the case was not before the judge.
Judge Chutkan takes bench
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan has taken the bench, kicking off the first hearing in former President Trump’s federal election subversion case before the judge in months.
Attorneys John Lauro, Todd Blanche and Emil Bove are in court for Trump; it’s unclear at this time whether Special Counsel Jack Smith himself is in attendance.
Jack Smith-Trump faceoff renewed
The main point of Thursday’s hearing is for Smith, along with Trump’s attorneys, to haggle over how to proceed in the case following the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling over the summer.
Trump’s team will also enter a not guilty plea in a revised election interference indictment.
It’s the first time both parties will be back in Chutkan’s court since the high court remanded the case after determining former presidents retain broad immunity from prosecution.
It’s up to Chutkan to disentangle many of the open questions left by the high court’s ruling, which while gutting parts of Smith’s case largely left it to the lower court to determine what aspects of Trump’s bid to remain in power can still face charges.
First time in Chutkan’s courtroom in nearly a year
Thursday’s hearing marks the first time the parties have convened in U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan’s courtroom since last October.
At that hearing, Chutkan issued a gag order against the former president. Soon after, the case froze as Trump began appealing the judge’s decision rejecting his presidential immunity defense.
Who are the lawyers?
Prosecutors
Jack Smith: As special counsel, Smith has spearheaded the two federal criminal prosecutions of Trump. Though he regularly attends hearings in the cases, he generally does not argue before the judge and observes his team from the courtroom gallery.
Thomas Windom: Windom has kept a notably low-profile since transferring to Smith’s team from the U.S. attorney’s office in Maryland, where he prosecuted members of a white supremacist group and often worked on cases related to national security. In Trump’s courtroom, he tends to do much of the arguing for prosecutors alongside fellow senior assistant special counsel Molly Gaston.
Molly Gaston: Gaston previously worked in the U.S. attorney’s office in D.C. and was part of its public integrity session. She helped successfully prosecute Trump White House adviser Steve Bannon on contempt of Congress charges for defying the House Jan. 6 committee.
Defense
Todd Blanche: Blanche has become one of Trump’s principal criminal defense attorneys, representing him in three of his four criminal prosecutions. A former federal prosecutor in New York, Blanche left his prestigious law firm early last year to represent the former president alongside attorney Emil Bove.
John Lauro: Also a prosecutor-turned-defense-attorney, Lauro has served as Trump’s local counsel in his federal Jan. 6 case. He is based out of Tampa and New York, though also practices in D.C. alongside attorney Greg Singer.
Who is the judge?
Chutkan was randomly assigned to oversee Trump’s case once he was charged. Nominated to D.C.’s federal district court by former President Obama in 2014, the Senate confirmed Chutkan to the bench in a 95-0 vote.
She is a former public defender who went on to work for Boies Schiller Flexner for 12 years. On the bench, she has gained a reputation for handing down harsh sentences to Jan. 6 defendants.
Like many of his other judges he perceives as enemies, Trump has repeatedly attacked Chutkan on social media and elsewhere and at one point unsuccessfully sought her recusal from the case.
Here’s the current status of Trump’s criminal cases
Only one of former President Trump’s four criminal prosecutions has reached trial. None of the remaining three are expected to reach a jury before November’s election, when Trump hopes to retake the White House and grind the cases to a halt.
Federal 2020 election subversion: This case is the subject of Thursday’s hearing. The parties are battling over how to move forward after the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling.
Hush money: A jury convicted Trump on all 34 counts of falsifying business records in May. Sentencing is scheduled for Sept. 18 but could be delayed.
Classified documents: Special Counsel Jack Smith is appealing a ruling dismissing the case after finding that Smith was unconstitutionally appointed.
Georgia 2020 election subversion: The case is frozen as appeals court hears Trump’s appeal seeking Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’s (D) removal from the case over her romantic relationship with a top prosecutor on the case, who has since resigned. Oral arguments are scheduled for December.