Donald Trump: Why Did Judge Pause Ex-POTUS' Jan. 6 Election Interference Case?

Judge Tanya Chutkan announced that she is pausing the January 6 election interference case against former President Donald Trump after Special Counsel Jack Smith went directly to the Supreme Court in order to keep the trial scheduled for March on track and prevent the ex-POTUS from using his usual delay tactics.

According to Fox News, Judge Chutkan acknowledged she does not have jurisdiction over the matter as it is now pending in the Supreme Court after the highest court in the land agreed to hear Jack Smith's case so it would not be bogged down in Trump delaying tactics through appeals.

Previously, a federal judge ruled that the case could go forward, deciding that Trump does not have any immunity in this case as presidents do not have any jurisdiction over election cases and thus this is not part of any presidential activities and, therefore not covered by presidential immunity.

However, the former president immediately tried to appeal the federal judge's decision, prompting Smith to go directly to the Supreme Court to stop Trump from constantly appealing and delaying the case.

Because of Smith's rather unusual move, Trump and his legal team now only have until next Wednesday, December 20, to respond to Smith's filing, though Trump attorneys did urge Judge Chutkan to pause proceedings, which she did, saying, she "agrees with both parties that Defendant's appeal automatically stays any further proceedings that would move this case towards trial or impose additional burdens of litigation on Defendant."

"Accordingly, and for clarity, the court hereby stays the deadlines and proceedings scheduled by its Pretrial Order, as amended," she wrote in her decision to pause the case for now, adding that if Trump, "asks the court reviewing his immunity appeal to also take a temporary jurisdiction over the enforcement of those measures, and that court agrees to do so, this court, of course, will be bound by that decision."

Former Republican Officials from Nixon to Bush Reject Donald Trump's Claims of Absolute Immunity

Meanwhile, several Republican officials from previous administrations, serving under presidents from Nixon to George W. Bush, have filed an amicus brief, urging a DC Circuit Court to reject Trump's claim that he has absolute presidential immunity that shields him from being prosecuted in United States v. Trump, the 2020 presidential election interference case.

"The vast immunity proposed by Appellant would encourage future Presidents who lose re-election to engage in criminal conduct, including deploying the military, in their efforts to prevent their lawfully-elected successors from commencing their exercise of the executive power," the former Republican administration officials wrote in the brief. "Such immunity would turn Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982), on its head by encouraging the greatest possible threat of 'intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch,' id. at 754 - a losing President's efforts to usurp the authority and functions of a lawful successor President."

Donald Trump Loses Immunity Battle Vs. E. Jean Carroll in Rape Case

While the Supreme Court is hearing about Trump's immunity claims for the January 6 election case, the former president lost his immunity battle in the E. Jean Carroll defamation case after the second US Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan threw out his case and upheld a federal judge's decision that rejected Trump's claims of immunity, according to The Guardian.

Carroll sued Trump for defamation and won after a judge ruled that Trump did not have immunity, saying that there was a delay in seeking to invoke it and the public interest in accountability.

This article is owned by Latin Post.

Written by: Rick Martin

WATCH: Supreme Court makes SURPRISE move in Trump trial - Brian Tyler Cohen