Trump finds common ground with Jack Smith in latest request to Supreme Court

In a Thursday afternoon filing to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), former President Donald Trump admitted to agreeing with the prosecutor who indicted him on multiple felony charges.

Following a US Appeals Court decision rejecting Trump's claim to absolute presidential immunity in the defamation lawsuit filed by writer E. Jean Carroll, the ex-president submitted a 138-page filing to SCOTUS in a last-ditch effort to have the nation's highest court decide the question for civil matters. The filing comes as SCOTUS is currently weighing whether to expedite its decision on total presidential immunity in criminal cases in United States v. Trump. In making his argument for the Court to decide on immunity, Trump ceded that Department of Justice special counsel Jack Smith was correct in one element of the case.

"In contrast to the district court's dismissive treatment of President Trump's immunity argument, Special Counsel Jack Smith asserted to the Supreme Court last week that the immunity issue presents a "weighty and consequential... constitutional question,' which is of 'exceptional national importance,'" Trump's filing read. "While President Trump disagrees with the Special Counsel's view on the merits and the Special Counsel's efforts to prevent the DC Circuit from first addressing the appeal, Mr. Smith is correct about the significance of the moment."

POLL: Should Trump be allowed to hold office again?

Trump has continued to argue in various courtrooms that his past role as president of the United States between 2017 and 2021 shields him from all civil and criminal accountability in perpetuity. After appealing a US District Judge's rejection of his total immunity claims, the US Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit upheld the lower court's decision in December, meaning Trump's civil trial is still set for January 16 in the event SCOTUS doesn't overrule the appellate court.

Columnist. E. Jean Carroll accused Trump of sexually assaulting her in a New York City department store in the 1990s. In 2019, Trump accused Carroll of lying, prompting Carroll to file her defamation lawsuit. Earlier this year, the judge overseeing the case awarded Carroll $5 million in damages after finding that Trump was not only liable for sexual abuse but also for defaming her.

If SCOTUS doesn't grant a writ of certiorari in the E. Jean Carroll case, the appellate court's ruling will stand, meaning Trump will have to endure yet another New York-based civil trial for the second time in six months, this time on the eve of the Iowa Republican Caucuses. His ongoing civil trial in Judge Arthur Engoron's court for allegedly filing fraudulent financial statements on behalf of his real estate company is could conclude in the coming weeks.

READ MORE: US appeals court strikes down Trump's immunity argument in E. Jean Carroll case