Politics

Justice Dept. pushes back against Trump’s bid for a 2026 trial in D.C.

Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr

The Justice Department pushed back Monday on former president Donald Trump’s claims that he cannot be ready to go to trial in January on charges that he illegally sought to subvert the results of the 2020 election.

A trial in D.C. federal court in April 2026, which Trump’s attorneys requested, “would deny the public its right to a speedy trial,” attorneys working for special counsel Jack Smith wrote in Monday’s filing. In arguing for its preferred Jan. 2, 2024, date, the office said they do not intend to use classified information against Trump in this case.

U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan is expected to set a trial date at a hearing Aug. 28. If prosecutors get their way, Trump will face two federal criminal trials before the 2024 presidential race, in which he is the leading Republican contender.

In arguing for more time, Trump also made misleading comparisons to trials that were delayed by the coronavirus pandemic, superseding indictments adding defendants, and disputes over incarceration, the government said.

Trump’s legal team argued in a court filing last week that it needs years to prepare for the “unprecedented case” and that the January date proposed by the government would create conflicts with the five other criminal and civil trials Trump faces in the next nine months. They told the court that the 11.5 million pages of material already handed over by the special counsel took over two days to download and if printed out would be eight times taller than the Washington Monument. To read it all before the government’s proposed jury selection date of Dec. 11 would be like reading “Tolstoy’s War and Peace, cover to cover, 78 times a day, every day,” they said.

Skip to end of carousel
History of investigations involving Donald Trump
In addition to his involvement in more than 4,000 lawsuits over the course of his half-century in real estate, entertainment and politics, Donald Trump has been the subject of investigations by federal, state and regulatory authorities in every decade of his long career.
1970s
Federal investigators accuse Trump and his father of discriminating against Black New Yorkers in renting out apartments. Case settles with no admission of guilt, but Trump has to run ads pledging not to discriminate.
1980s
Federal investigators look into whether Trump gave apartments in his Trump Tower to figures connected with organized crime to keep his project on track. Trump denies the allegation. Separately, New Jersey officials probe his ties with mob figures, then grant him a casino license.
1990s
New Jersey regulators investigate Trump’s finances and conclude he “cannot be considered financially stable,” yet extend his casino license to protect jobs at his Atlantic City hotel.
2000s
Federal securities regulators cite Trump’s casino for downplaying negative results in financial reporting.
2010s
New York state sues Trump, alleging his Trump University defrauded more than 5,000 people. Trump is found personally liable. After Trump becomes president, he is impeached — and acquitted — over allegations that he solicited foreign interference in the U.S. presidential election.
2020s
Trump is impeached — and acquitted — a second time for incitement of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. New York state sues Trump, alleging he inflated assets to mislead lenders. He is also under criminal investigation for events surrounding Jan. 6 and his handling of classified documents.

1/7

End of carousel

Smith’s office called those comparisons “neither helpful nor insightful,” because attorneys don’t read evidence cover to cover — they review it online using electronic keyword searches. Much of what was shared with Trump is already in the public domain, the special counsel said, including social media posts, transcripts of interviews with the House committee that investigated the Jan. 6 attack, and court records from legal challenges to the election results. Other documents came from the National Archives, meaning they were already known to Trump. There are also duplicates of documents within the production, the Justice Department said, and likely irrelevant papers handed over “in an abundance of caution and transparency.”

Smith’s office said it took pains to separate that extraneous documentation from the “most pertinent” evidence “in an exceptionally organized, clear, and user-friendly fashion.” The prosecutors said they were also prepared to identify the individual exhibits they plan to introduce at trial well in advance of trial if ordered to do so by Chutkan.

Although the Justice Department has said there is a small amount of classified material in its investigation, it is not expected to come up in the D.C. case against Trump.

The same special counsel’s office is prosecuting Trump in Florida federal court for allegedly mishandling classified information. The prosecutors said any conflicts with that trial, set for May, or Trump’s other legal proceedings can be worked out on a case-by-case basis. For example, prosecutors had proposed jury selection in D.C. to start Dec. 11 but now suggest pushing it to later that week because of a hearing in Florida.

This post appeared first on The Washington Post