WASHINGTON DC, USA — With President-elect Donald Trump’s recent victory, special counsel Jack Smith has requested additional time to assess the next steps in the federal election-interference case against him, signaling a likely dismissal.
The development has drawn swift reactions from critics who hoped Trump would be held accountable.
The case, which revolves around Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election and alleged involvement in the January 6 Capitol insurrection, has been a focal point of the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) prosecution efforts.
Yet, Trump’s victory in the 2024 presidential election could change the course of legal action.
Smith’s Friday filing with the court comes just days after Election Day, and his request to pause the case’s schedule has left many critics disheartened.
“Mueller, She Wrote,” a political podcast led by former Veterans Affairs official Allison Gill, expressed the sentiment shared by many: “All that work. All those filings. And Donald gets to just walk away from accountability. It’s profoundly depressing for those of us who seek justice.”
It’s hard for me to explain the depth of sadness I feel about Jack Smith moving to vacate the remaining schedule in the DC case. All that work. All those filings. And Donald gets to just walk away from accountability. It’s profoundly depressing for those of us who seek justice.
— Mueller, She Wrote (@MuellerSheWrote) November 8, 2024
Trump, who has consistently denied wrongdoing and pleaded not guilty to charges of conspiracy to defraud the U.S., obstruction, and other charges related to the case, had previously vowed to remove Smith from his role if re-elected.
Now that Trump’s election victory is set to be certified in January, former federal prosecutor Michael McAuliffe told Newsweek that “the Justice Department will almost certainly dismiss the prosecution.”
Court and DOJ Prepare for Possible Dismissal
Judge Tanya Chutkan, overseeing the case, approved Smith’s request on Friday, November 8, 2024, postponing all remaining deadlines until the DOJ can re-evaluate the case in light of Trump’s election win.
In his court filing, Smith noted, “The Government respectfully requests that the Court vacate the remaining deadlines… to afford the Government time to assess this unprecedented circumstance.”
Smith also informed the court that he had consulted with Trump’s legal team, who had “no objections” to the request.
A status update is expected by December 2, allowing the DOJ to reassess its stance in alignment with internal policies, which typically avoid prosecuting a sitting or incoming president for alleged crimes.
Critics Say DOJ’s Delay Undermines Accountability
Many critics of the former president see Smith’s pause as a capitulation.
Norm Eisen, a legal analyst and author of Trying Trump, argued that instead of delaying, Smith should push the case forward.
“This is the opposite of how to oppose autocracy,” Eisen posted on social media. Other voices echoed Eisen’s frustration, with podcast host Dash Dobrofsky asserting,
“Jack Smith just officially brought Donald Trump’s January 6th criminal case to a close… Merrick Garland lied. Donald Trump is above the rule of law in America.”
This is the opposite of how to oppose autocracy
Evidence & experience counsel that Smith should push forward pending Jan. 20 👉 pic.twitter.com/MzhP05IRzC
— Norm Eisen (#TryingTrump out now!) (@NormEisen) November 8, 2024
Jack Smith just officially brought Donald Trump’s January 6th criminal case to a close, even though a grand jury found sufficient evidence to bring an indictment against Trump for the crimes he committed.
Merrick Garland lied. Donald Trump is above the rule of law in America.
— Dash Dobrofsky (@DashDobrofsky) November 8, 2024
Critics cite recent events in authoritarian regimes worldwide, where legal accountability for leaders has often been curtailed post-election.
These figures argue that delaying or dismissing cases against Trump sets a dangerous precedent for U.S. democracy.
Trump’s Legal Path Forward
Trump’s legal team has long maintained that Smith’s appointment as special counsel was improper, a claim likely to remain untested if the case is dismissed.
Smith’s team has encountered similar challenges, such as the attempted dismissal before Election Day, which Trump’s lawyers argued was based on Smith’s supposed illegitimacy.
The special counsel’s decision comes amid speculation that the Biden administration’s DOJ could face political pressure in handling cases against Trump.
Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Smith in 2022 to lead the special counsel’s probe, a move some say was aimed at maintaining the DOJ’s impartiality.
However, Garland’s department now faces criticism over the delay and the potential closure of the election-interference case.
Legal Experts on the Path Ahead
While some legal experts agree with Smith’s cautious approach, others warn of the implications of abandoning high-profile cases.
“What the DOJ chooses now could define its credibility for years to come,” said Eugene Robinson, a law professor at Georgetown University.
As Smith and his team prepare their December report, the DOJ faces mounting pressure to address public concerns over accountability for high-ranking officials, especially those who wield considerable political influence.
The DOJ’s final decision on the election-interference case could be a pivotal moment, reflecting both the boundaries of prosecutorial power and the enduring challenges of maintaining public trust in the American justice system.
