The Justice Department has urged a judge to deny Donald Trump’s request for a postponement of his trial concerning the mishandling of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate. In response to Trump’s lawyers, who argued that the case involved novel legal issues and required more time to prepare, prosecutors on special counsel Jack Smith’s team stated that there was no basis for an indefinite delay. They proposed a trial date of December 11 and emphasized that any legal arguments presented by the defense did not warrant a postponement beyond that date.
Trial Date Proposed
Federal prosecutors initially suggested December 11 as the trial date for Trump, who faces 37 felony counts related to the mishandling of classified documents. However, the final decision lies with the judge.
Trump’s legal team countered by claiming that proceeding with a trial within six months of the indictment was unreasonable and would result in a miscarriage of justice. They did not propose an alternative date but highlighted the novel legal issues involved in the case as a reason for delay.
Prosecutors from special counsel Jack Smith’s team dismissed the defense’s arguments, stating that they had already provided grand jury transcripts and unclassified witness statements. They further assured that witness statements from interviews conducted through June 23 would be produced in the next week. As a result, they asserted that there was no need to postpone the trial beyond the December date they recommended.
Also read: Kushner, other top Trump aides testified before grand jury in Jan. 6 probe: reports
A Noteworthy Defense Argument
Defense lawyers in a high-profile case requested a continuance, claiming that they had not yet received the necessary classified evidence. However, prosecutors disputed this claim, revealing that only two of the attorneys had actually applied for a security clearance to access such evidence.
Consideration of Trump’s Campaign Schedule
The defense also argued that the trial scheduling should take into account Donald Trump’s busy campaign schedule for the 2024 Republican nomination. Prosecutors quickly dismissed this argument, stating that many indicted defendants have demanding jobs that require their time, energy, and travel.
The Feasibility of an Impartial Jury
In response to concerns about selecting an impartial jury before the presidential election, the Justice Department firmly disagreed. They emphasized that our jury system relies on the Court’s ability to develop a meticulous and effective jury selection process. Furthermore, they expressed confidence in prospective jurors’ capacity to make decisions based on presented evidence and legal instructions from the Court.
The prosecutors acknowledged that jury selection in this particular case may warrant additional protocols, such as a questionnaire, and could be more time-consuming than usual. However, they asserted that these factors should prompt an earlier start to the process rather than a delay.