Written by Ashton Snyder on
 May 15, 2024

Supreme Court Filing Challenges Special Counsel Appointment

Trump's legal team and supporters argue that Smith's appointment is unauthorized and unconstitutional, while others assert that there is statutory authority for such an appointment.

According to MSN News, Former President Donald Trump's legal team has mounted a vigorous challenge against the appointment of Jack Smith as special counsel. They argue that Smith’s appointment is unauthorized and violates constitutional requirements. Trump's attorneys claim that Smith's appointment lacks statutory and constitutional authority.

Arguments Against Smith's Appointment

Attorneys representing former Attorney General Ed Meese and constitutional law scholars have filed a brief supporting the challenge to Smith's appointment. This brief contends that Congress alone has the authority to create such positions, and it did not do so in this instance. The amicus brief further argues that Smith was not properly appointed to the office of special counsel.

The brief warns that if the court accepts their arguments, all charges against Trump could be dismissed. The legal team is seeking to invalidate Smith's appointment because the statutory or constitutional framework did not properly sanction it.

Trump’s Claims About Biden’s Involvement

Trump has publicly claimed that a recent court filing indicates that Smith is taking direction from President Joe Biden. However, the court filing itself states that while Smith remains subject to ultimate supervision by the attorney general, he retains independent decision-making authority. This filing is central to the ongoing investigations involving Trump.

Trump has been vocal about his belief that the Biden administration is orchestrating Smith's actions against him. He wrote:

While Crooked Joe Biden and his Cronies have claimed from the outset they have nothing to do with Jack Smith’s Election Interference case against me, Smith himself admitted in a Court Filing yesterday that he ‘remains subject to Attorney General direction and supervision,’ and that includes Biden.

Legal Experts Defend Smith's Appointment

Legal experts, including constitutional law professor Peter Shane, argue that statutory authority exists for appointing a special counsel. Shane cites 28 USC 515, which outlines the authority of the attorney general or any Department of Justice officer to conduct legal proceedings and appoint a special counsel. Shane emphasizes that the law provides for such appointments as part of the DOJ’s framework.

The debate over Smith's appointment has significant implications for the legal proceedings involving Trump. If the challenge to Smith's appointment is successful, it could undermine the legitimacy of the indictments against Trump and the special counsel's authority. This controversy raises important questions about the legal framework for appointing special counsels and their role in high-profile investigations.

Potential Outcomes Of The Legal Challenge

The resolution of this dispute may have far-reaching consequences for the ongoing legal battles surrounding Trump. If the arguments against Smith’s appointment are upheld, it could lead to the dismissal of charges and a reevaluation of the special counsel’s role. This legal battle underscores the contentious nature of the investigations and the high stakes involved.

The amicus brief filed by Trump's supporters states, “Even if one somehow thinks that existing statutes authorize the appointment of stand-alone special counsels with the full power of a U.S. Attorney, Smith was not properly appointed to such an ‘office.’”

Broader Implications For The Department Of Justice

Beyond the immediate legal battles, this controversy may prompt a broader examination of the Department of Justice's procedures for appointing special counsels. The debate highlights the tension between executive authority and statutory limits and the potential need for clearer guidelines.

Despite the court filing's clarification, Trump’s assertions about Biden’s involvement continue to fuel the political and legal discourse. Trump added:

That’s right, Jack Smith just admitted what the American People already know, namely, that his case is being directed and supervised by the Biden Administration. So, although he denies it, [Attorney General Merrick] Garland is carrying out the orders from his boss to prosecute me, and to interfere in the 2024 election.


The appointment of Jack Smith as special counsel in cases involving Donald Trump has sparked controversy, with Trump's legal team challenging the legality of the appointment and experts defending its validity. The outcome of this dispute could influence the legitimacy of the indictments against Trump and future special counsel appointments, making it a significant point of focus in ongoing legal battles.

Author Image

About Ashton Snyder

Independent conservative news without a leftist agenda.
© 2024 - American Tribune - All rights reserved
Privacy Policy