Donald Trump’s D.C. election-interference trial faces a pivotal moment as Supreme Court decides presidential immunity issue.
Welcome back to the Trump Trial newsletter, where we’ll be a bit manic Monday, waiting for the Supreme Court decision on Trump’s claim that presidential immunity prevents his prosecution for allegedly conspiring to obstruct the results of the 2020 election.Have questions on Trump’s trials? Email us at
perry.stein@washpost.com and devlin.barrett@washpost.com and check for answers in future newsletters. (Like what you’re reading? Sign up to get The Trump Trials in your email inbox every Sunday.)
Okay, let’s get started.Legal experts expect the court will reject Trump’s broad claim of presidential immunity — but the how of it will be very important. If the court leaves conditions or a degree of ambiguity in its ruling, that could create more legal issues to fight over before the federal case against Trump can go to trial. And remember, if Trump becomes president again, any remaining trials may get dropped or delayed until he again leaves the White House.Florida: Federal classified documents case
Return to menu
The details: Trump faces 40 federal charges over accusations that 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: Indefinitely postponed
Last week: U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon held a series of hearings on pretrial issues, including defense arguments to have the indictment dismissed. The hearings were occasionally contentious, as prosecutors grow increasingly impatient with the slow pace of the case.Cannon later denied a Trump request for a hearing on one issue but granted requests for a hearing on two others — whether the Mara-a-Lago search warrant was too vague, and whether prosecutors may use the audio notes of a former Trump lawyer against him.
Based on the known evidence, those defense arguments can be charitably called long shots, but the stakes are higher for one than the other. If prosecutors were to lose the statements of ex-Trump lawyer Evan Corcoran, that would make a dent in their presentation; if they were to lose the evidence gathered in the search of Trump’s Florida home — more than 100 classified documents — that would leave a gaping hole in the heart of the case.Cannon also held a hearing on special counsel Jack Smith’s request to modify the conditions of Trump’s release to bar him from making any further pointed criticism of the FBI agents who worked on his case. While not technically a gag order, Smith’s request, if granted, would function similarly, with the additional danger for Trump that a violation could result in him being sent to jail, as opposed to a fine.Nerd word of the week
Return to menu
Spoliation: One of those words that even veteran lawyers sometimes struggle to pronounce correctly, spoliation is the destruction of evidence.
In the Florida classified documents case, the special counsel filed court papers last week pushing back against Trump’s claim that the case should be thrown out because FBI agents did not preserve the precise order of documents and other items found in boxes at Mar-a-Lago. That amounts to spoliation, the defense claims, and should result in the dismissal of the charges against Trump.Prosecutors called that argument absurd, noting not only that Trump’s boxes were a seemingly disorganized mess, but that the legal standard for a spoliation claim is quite high — judges typically have to be convinced the evidence destruction was both intentional and consequential. Cannon has yet to decide whether to hold a hearing on the issue.