Chutkan slams Trump in latest ruling rejecting immunity argument: No 'divine right of kings'

In a blistering new 48-page ruling denying both of former President Donald Trump's motions to dismiss his January 6 charges, US District Judge Tanya Chutkan soundly rejected his argument that being a former president shields him from any accountability.

Previously, the ex-president's attorneys submitted a motion to dismiss the four charges brought by special counsel Jack Smith in relation to Trump's alleged plot to overturn the 2020 presidential election. The core of the motion's argument was that Trump was immune given that he was acting in his duties as president to safeguard federal elections. However, Judge Chutkan rejected that argument, writing that "nothing in the Constitution's text or allocation of government powers requires exempting former Presidents from that solemn process [of criminal justice]."

"Defendant's four-year service as commander in chief did not bestow on him the divine right of kings to evade the criminal accountability that governs his fellow citizens," Chutkan wrote.

POLL: Should Trump be allowed to hold office again?

In his own briefing railing against Trump's absolute immunity argument, Jack Smith cited the prosecutions of numerous previous presidents, including Richard Nixon's impeachment trial in the Senate, the civil suit against former President Bill Clinton, and even Trump's own 2021 impeachment trial in the wake of the January 6 riot.

“The implications of the defendant’s unbounded immunity theory are startling,” Smith's filing read. “It would grant absolute immunity from criminal prosecution to a president who accepts a bribe in exchange for a lucrative government contract for a family member; a president who instructs his FBI Director to plant incriminating evidence on a political enemy; a president who orders the National Guard to murder his most prominent critics; or a president who sells nuclear secrets to a foreign adversary.”

In addition to rejecting Trump's motion to dismiss based on immunity, she also rejected Trump's First Amendment arguments in favor of dismissal.

"It is well established that the First Amendment does not protect speech that is used as an instrument of a crime," Chutkan wrote.

READ MORE: Jack Smith just tore apart Trump's 'startling' absolute immunity argument