Trump Had a Bad Week in Court

Former President Donald Trump’s lawyers accused Special Counsel Jack Smith of trying to ruin their holidays by forcing them to spend late December toiling over legal briefs. They even called Smith a “Grinch.”  

But despite their best efforts, they failed: Trump lost two important tests in court this week. Combined, they augur bad news for Trump’s efforts to wriggle out of facing a criminal trial in 2024. 

In both instances, the big issue at stake is the speed of Trump’s Washington D.C. criminal case over his alleged attempts to subvert the 2020 election—which is emerging as the crucial case to watch of Trump’s four sets of criminal charges, because it’s the most likely to deliver a conviction and a serious prison sentence before election day in 2024. 

Trump’s strategy is to slow the process down, push all his trials past election day, win back the White House, and then use the powers of the presidency to stymie prosecutors indefinitely. But this week, two different courts both showed they intend to move extremely quickly—throwing this gambit into doubt. 

Want the best of VICE News straight to your inbox? Sign up here.

On Monday, the Supreme Court took just a single day to respond to a request from Smith about a matter that threatens to create a significant delay—in what amounts to a hyperdrive turnaround for the high court. And then, on Wednesday, Trump’s lawyers got even more bad news. The D.C. Court of Appeals also signaled it will move quickly, blowing off Trump’s legal team’s gripes about the holidays. 

“The timeline for Donald Trump to possibly slow down this trial is diminishing,” said Gene Rossi, a former federal prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia. “The Supreme Court’s action to expedite its review is a clear sign that the Jan. 6 trial in the District of Columbia will be held sometime in the first half of next year.”

Both the Supreme Court and the D.C. Court of Appeals are essentially working on the same issue, at the same time: Trump’s appeal over his defeated attempt to secure immunity from prosecution. 

Trump has argued that, as a former president, he deserves “absolute immunity from criminal prosecution” for any wrongdoing committed while in office. He also claimed that he should be exempt from this criminal particular prosecution on the grounds of “double jeopardy,” because he was already impeached over the events of Jan. 6 by the House of Representatives (though acquitted by the Senate).  

Trump’s initial attempt to claim immunity was slapped down by the judge overseeing his case, District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan. But the case has now been essentially frozen in time while Trump appeals her decision. And that deep freeze will continue while the D.C. Court of Appeals and, potentially, the Supreme Court, resolve the matter. 

Trump is currently scheduled to go to trial in this case on March 4. But if the appeal process takes too long, that date could be pushed back considerably. 

On Monday, the Supreme Court took only a single day to agree that it will consider Smith’s request that he be allowed to leap-frog the D.C. Court of Appeals and bring the issue all the way to the top court immediately. The high court gave Trump’s lawyers until Dec. 20th to respond.

Then on Wednesday, the D.C. Court of Appeals revealed that it too would move quickly. The appeals court set a briefing schedule that will be wrapped up entirely by Jan. 2—indicating that a decision could land sometime in January, possibly after oral arguments to be scheduled later. 

Earlier that day, Trump’s attorneys urged the D.C. Court of Appeals to take its sweet time, saying that a “reckless rush to judgment” would “irreparably undermine public confidence in the judicial system.”

Trump attorney D. John Sauer argued there is no good reason for the judiciary to attempt to stick to the current March 4 trial date. 

“The date of March 4, 2024, has no talismanic significance,” he wrote. “Aside from the prosecution’s unlawful partisan motives, there is no compelling reason that date must be maintained.”

And what’s more, they argued, working through the holidays would be rough on the lawyers. 

“This proposed schedule would require attorneys and support staff to work round-the-clock through the holidays, inevitably disrupting family and travel plans,” Trump’s team wrote. “It is as if the Special Counsel “growled, with his Grinch fingers nervously drumming, ‘I must find some way to keep Christmas from coming. … But how?’”

The D.C. Court of Appeals brushed aside these arguments.  

The result of all the legal wrangling is that both of the courts that Trump is counting on to slow down his case are moving at break-neck speed—in a sign that his attempts to secure a delay may not save him. 

And Trump’s attorneys, evidently, will have to work through the holidays after all.