Special counsel Jack Smith's most recent legal tactics have sparked controversy, with critics claiming he is bending standard procedures to negatively impact former President Donald Trump ahead of the November election.
Smith’s approach has drawn sharp criticism, with some, including a prominent CNN commentator, alleging his actions compromise legal norms and aim to harm Trump politically, as Fox News reports.
Elie Honig, a legal analyst and former federal prosecutor, expressed concern on the cable network over Smith’s handling of a federal court filing related to Trump's claims of immunity from prosecution. In a recent New York magazine article, Honig argued that Smith's conduct strays from principled legal practices and could unfairly affect Trump's chances in the upcoming election.
The controversy centers on a 165-page document Smith submitted, which addressed Trump's immunity claim. What made the move particularly unusual was that Smith's filing came without a defense motion, a step typically reserved for a response to a motion from the defense. This break from normal procedures caught the attention of Trump’s legal team, who objected to the filing.
Despite the objections, Judge Tanya Chutkan, who has overseen several key rulings related to the case, allowed Smith’s lengthy brief to stand. Chutkan had previously set a deadline to resolve the immunity issue by Nov. 5, further fueling concerns that this legal battle might interfere with the electoral process.
The judge did acknowledge the procedural irregularity of Smith’s filing, but nonetheless ruled in his favor. This decision has raised eyebrows, particularly given the judge’s history of ruling in Smith's favor in other critical moments of the case.
Honig voiced his concern about the implications of Smith’s actions. He pointed out that by bending procedural rules, Smith risks undermining public trust in the justice system. “At this point,” Honig said, “there’s simply no defending Smith’s conduct on any sort of principled or institutional basis.” Moreover, Honig emphasized that prosecutors should not shift their legal approach based on the identity of the defendant. The legal analyst argued that Smith’s conduct was "unprincipled" and could set a dangerous precedent in high-profile cases.
Smith’s decision to proactively file the brief, rather than waiting for a defense motion, was particularly troubling to Honig. He argued that this deviation from normal procedure seemed calculated to inflict legal and political damage on Trump, particularly as the 2024 election looms.
In addition to the procedural concerns, the filing also contained grand jury testimony. Such testimony is typically kept confidential at this stage of a case. Honig took issue with the inclusion of this material, suggesting it could influence public perception before Trump’s legal team has had a chance to respond. Smith’s filing was made public after certain names were redacted, per Judge Chutkan’s decision. Nevertheless, Honig criticized the timing and content of the document, suggesting it could be part of a broader strategy to shape public opinion before key legal rulings are made.
Trump’s legal team, meanwhile, has expressed frustration with Smith’s tactics, describing the approach as prejudicial and an attempt to damage Trump politically. The team has noted that despite the unusual nature of Smith’s filing, the court has consistently ruled in his favor.
Another key issue raised by Honig is the potential breach of Department of Justice (DOJ) principles. Smith’s actions, he argued, run counter to established DOJ policies regarding the fair handling of cases. In Honig’s view, if prosecutors selectively bend rules depending on the individual being prosecuted, it undermines the integrity of the entire legal system.
Honig’s critique of Smith extended beyond just this case, with the former prosecutor suggesting that these tactics reflect a broader disregard for legal norms. He warned that if such practices become commonplace, they could erode the principles that have long governed criminal prosecutions in the United States.
The unsealed document included a statement from Smith asserting that Trump is not immune from prosecution, contradicting the defense’s argument. Smith’s position underscores the need for a trial to address Trump’s alleged "private crimes," further intensifying the political and legal stakes surrounding the case.
