Special Counsel Jack Smith has boldly reignited the debate over Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election results amid the intensifying race for the White House in 2024.
By seeking to revive his case following the Supreme Court’s ruling that weakened his initial indictment due to presidential immunity, Smith has made it clear that he is intent on holding the former president accountable—even though a trial won’t occur before the 2024 Election Day.
“This is essentially Jack Smith saying, ‘I’m still in control of this case,’” remarked Andrew McCabe, former FBI Deputy Director and CNN legal and national security analyst, following Smith’s submission of a revised indictment backed by a new grand jury on Tuesday.
Former President Donald Trump delivers a speech at II Toro E La Capra in Las Vegas on August 23.
Trump’s decision highlights his deep personal stakes in securing a victory in November’s presidential election: a win would not only return him to the Oval Office but also grant him the power to dismiss this and another federal case against him, potentially avoiding any prison sentences if he is found guilty.
The Supreme Court’s conservative majority’s ruling earlier this summer—indicating that Trump could be shielded from criminal prosecution for some actions as president—marked one of the most impactful decisions in the Court’s history. The implications for the American government system are vast. Many legal scholars criticized the decision, arguing it contradicts the principles of the nation’s founders by seemingly granting excessive unchecked powers to the presidency.
The ruling sent ripples through an already turbulent presidential race, suggesting that an ex-president who already viewed himself as above constraints could pursue a more authoritarian approach if he wins in November. Democratic candidate Kamala Harris voiced her concerns about the decision in her convention speech last week: “Think of the power he will hold… Imagine Donald Trump without any limits, and how he could wield the vast authority of the U.S. presidency.”
Smith’s recent legal maneuver adds another layer of political, legal, and constitutional complexity at a crucial time for the nation, with just 10 weeks until an election that could dramatically reshape America and once again put its democratic institutions to the test.
What’s in the new indictment?
The core facts and evidence in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s case remain the same. The revised indictment continues to accuse former President Donald Trump of conspiring to defraud the U.S. government by disrupting the electoral vote count and obstructing the certification of Joe Biden’s win. It also alleges a conspiracy against citizens’ fundamental right to vote and have their votes counted.
However, following a Supreme Court ruling, Smith adjusted the language in the indictment, removing references to Trump using the Justice Department to advance his claims of election fraud. Instead, he reframed much of the alleged conduct to portray Trump as a “candidate” rather than a president acting within his official duties, aiming to bypass the immunity issue central to the court’s decision.
Smith still faces significant challenges. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan must now interpret the Supreme Court’s ruling to determine which evidence can be used in court. Trump’s legal team is expected to contest Smith’s case vigorously, leveraging every appeal option available. They may argue that Smith is violating Justice Department norms against legal actions targeting prominent political figures so close to an election. The reason the original case did not proceed to trial earlier is partly due to the delays orchestrated by Trump’s legal team.
“If Donald Trump doesn’t like how late this is happening, he should not have been delaying and postponing for many, many months,” said Maryland Representative Jamie Raskin, a Democrat who served on the House committee investigating the January 6th Capitol attack, on CNN’s “The Situation Room.” He added, “Jack Smith is playing the cards he’s been dealt by Donald Trump and by Trump’s supporters on the Roberts Court who have made this go as slow as possible. And I think there’s something quietly heroic about Jack Smith insisting on going forward to make sure that this plot comes to light.”
Despite Trump’s success in stalling the initial January 6th federal case, his team couldn’t prevent his conviction in a hush money case tied to the 2016 election or a substantial fraud judgment against him, his business, and his sons in New York. Trump was also held liable for defamation in a separate case involving sexual assault claims by writer E. Jean Carroll. Yet, a Trump-appointed judge in Florida recently dismissed Smith’s classified documents case against Trump, although the special counsel is appealing. Another election-related case in Georgia has also experienced multiple delays. Trump has pleaded not guilty to all charges.
Immediate Political Ramifications
Smith’s renewed effort to hold Trump accountable introduces a fresh dimension to the ongoing electoral battle against the new Democratic nominee, Kamala Harris. The revised indictment brings Trump’s alleged criminal conduct and authoritarian aspirations back into the spotlight after these issues had faded amid Biden’s controversial debate performance, his withdrawal from the race, and Harris’s strong start to her campaign. While the case is unlikely to reach trial before the election, any potential evidentiary hearings could generate significant media coverage of Trump’s legal troubles as early voting begins.
For most candidates, facing yet another indictment during a presidential campaign would be a damaging blow. However, Trump has historically used his legal challenges to bolster his campaign, particularly during the Republican primaries. This latest indictment comes almost exactly a year after his booking at an Atlanta jail, where his mugshot was turned into a symbol of defiance by his campaign.
Recently, Trump has struggled to gain momentum against the new Democratic contender. His legal troubles had not been a dominant theme in the campaign until Smith’s new charges surfaced. Once they did, Trump’s team quickly reverted to its familiar narrative: that he is a victim of election interference orchestrated by a partisan Biden Justice Department. Trump described Smith’s latest move as an attempt to “revive a ‘dead’ Witch Hunt in Washington, D.C., in an act of desperation.” He also claimed the indictment was designed to divert attention from “the disasters Kamala Harris has caused in our country.”
In typical fashion, it wasn’t long before a new fundraising appeal linked to the case was sent out to supporters.
