Trump Trials: Amid holidays, waiting for appeal of Colorado ruling – The Washington Post
Happy holidays and welcome back to The Trump Trials, our effort to keep readers up to date on the many criminal cases and other types of litigation involving the 45th president. It’s a short week, but the dockets are open for business — and we could see some action in the nation’s highest court.
(Have questions on the upcoming trials? Email us at perry.stein@washpost.com and devlin.barrett@washpost.com and check for answers in future editions of The Trump Trials.)
Okay, let’s get started.
The big news we are monitoring is Trump’s anticipated appeal to the Supreme Court of last week’s ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court, which barred Trump from appearing on the ballot in that state’s 2024 GOP presidential primary.
The court schedules should start picking up in the new year, with oral arguments scheduled Jan. 9 in the D.C. Circuit federal appeals court to determine whether Trump’s federal election obstruction case should be dismissed because of presidential immunity. (More on that below.)
Now, a recap of last week’s action.
The details: Four counts related to conspiring to obstruct the 2020 election results.
Planned trial date: March 4
What happened: SCOTUS denied special counsel Jack Smith’s request for the justices to short-circuit the appeals process and rule quickly on whether presidential immunity shields Trump from criminal prosecution in the D.C. case. Smith wanted to skip having the lower appeals court weigh in, in hopes of keeping the case on schedule.
Trump is under limited gag orders in both his federal criminal case in D.C. and his civil business fraud trial in New York. Both orders restrict him from attacking certain people involved with the cases.
In D.C., Trump’s lawyers asked the entire appeals court to reconsider the decision of a three-judge panel that the gag order could stay in place, albeit somewhat slimmed-down. The request was for the matter to be heard en banc. (As our die-hard readers know, that was a Nerd Word earlier this month.)
The details: Trump faces 13 state charges for allegedly trying to undo the election results in that state. Eighteen people were charged alongside Trump; four have pleaded guilty.
Planned trial date: None yet
What happened last week: An appeals court upheld a ruling that Mark Meadows, Trump’s former chief of staff, cannot move his Georgia case to federal court. Meadows, who was indicted alongside Trump, can appeal to the Supreme Court. He is trying to claim protections under a statute that allows federal officials to move cases from state to federal court when the charges are tied to official duties.
The details: Trump faces 40 charges over accusations he kept top-secret government documents at Mar-a-Lago — his home and private club — and thwarted government demands to return them.
Planned trial date: May 20
What happened: Judge Aileen Cannon ordered prosecutors and Trump’s attorneys work to submit a joint questionnaire that would be sent to prospective jurors ahead of in-person jury selection, a common way of winnowing down the jury pool in high-profile cases.
Which leads us to our …
Voir dire: This is a French term that translates to “speak the truth.” It refers to the questioning of potential jurists during the selection process.
In Trump’s cases, we expect voir dire to be particularly rigorous as attorneys on both sides ask potential jurists a litany of personal questions to ensure they select an impartial panel.
The details: 34 charges connected to a 2016 hush money payment.
Planned trial date: March 25
Last week: No action in the New York courthouse.
Q. The Supreme Court is conservative-leaning. Three of the nine justice were appointed by Trump. Is it a slam dunk that the court will eventually rule in Trump’s favor on presidential immunity?
A. We don’t know how the Supreme Court will rule, but don’t assume the judges will side with Trump. The conservative majority has certainly ruled in favor of policies that Trump has backed. But when it comes to Trump himself, and executive privileges, they tend to rule against him.
In 2022, for example, the Supreme Court effectively rejected Trump’s claims of executive privilege and denied his request to block the release of some of his White House records to a congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021 attack. And they rejected Trump’s effort to block a congressional committee from examining his tax returns.
Supreme Court seems destined to play pivotal role in 2024 elections
Disqualifying Trump may be legally sound, but fraught for democracy, legal scholars say.
Trump team data suggests clinching the nomination by March