Judge Tanya S. Chutkan, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia

Judge Chutkan Says It Would Be ‘Election Interference’ If She Didn’t Release Jack Smith’s Evidence Against Trump

Judge Tanya S. Chutkan, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
Judge Tanya S. Chutkan, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia

Judge Tanya Chutkan denied former president Donald Trump’s request to withhold the rest of special counsel Jack Smith’s evidence, releasing the redacted documents Friday.

While Trump objected to releasing the materials so close to the election, Chutkan wrote it would be “election interference” not to publicly disclose the materials. Four heavily redacted appendix documents totaling over 1,800 pages were filed on the public docket, featuring public information like Trump’s tweets, communications records and portions of Jan. 6 committee testimony.

READ: Mother Of 12-Year-Old Girl Killed By Illegal Immigrant Says Harris Gave ‘Half-Open Apology’ When Pressed By Bret Baier

“If the court withheld information that the public otherwise had a right to access solely because of the potential political consequences of releasing it, that withholding could itself constitute — or appear to be — election interference,” Chutkan wrote in an order Thursday night. “The court will therefore continue to keep political considerations out of its decision-making, rather than incorporating them as Defendant requests.”

Chutkan also released Smith’s lengthy motion on presidential immunity earlier this month, which detailed the evidence he would introduce at trial. Smith argued that the allegations contained in the superseding indictment are not covered by the Supreme Court’s July decision finding former presidents immune from prosecution for official acts taken in office.

Trump’s attorneys objected to releasing any of the information, arguing it amounts to “overt and inappropriate election interference.”

READ: Harris Says She Can’t Be ‘Critical’ Of Joe Biden As VP When Pressed About What She Would Do Differently

“There should be no further disclosures at this time of the so called ‘evidence’ that the Special Counsel’s Office has unlawfully cherry-picked and mischaracterized — during early voting in the 2024 Presidential election — in connection with an improper Presidential immunity filing that has no basis in criminal procedure or judicial precedent,” his attorneys wrote in an Oct. 10 filing.

Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.

Android Users: Download our free app to stay up-to-date on the latest news.

Connect with us: Follow the Tampa Free Press on Facebook and Twitter for breaking news and updates.

Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox.

Daily Caller News Foundation

First published by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Login To Facebook To Comment