Why Jack Smith’s Trump indictments aren’t 'over — by a long shot': legal expert

At the 2024 Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, Donald Trump became the first GOP presidential candidate in U.S. history to receive his party's nomination despite facing three criminal indictments — a number that decreased from four after Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed special counsel Jack Smith's Mar-a-Lago documents case.

Smith's election interference indictment, however, remains active, although the special counsel's office has been trying to determine how the case is affected by the U.S. Supreme Court's 6-3 ruling in Trump v. the United States — which said that presidents enjoy absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for "official" acts but not for "unofficial" acts.

In an opinion column published on July 30, MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin explains where things presently "stand" with Smith's indictments.

READ MORE: 'Feckless dolts': Analysis details why 'albatross' JD Vance signifies a larger problem for Trump

"While both cases have hit serious roadblocks," Rubin argues, "neither is over by a long shot."

Rubin notes that Smith's office has filed a "notice of appeal" in response to Cannon's ruling in the classified documents case.

"The bottom line: The Mar-a-Lago documents case is over for now," Rubin observes. "But it could come back with a vengeance after the 11th Circuit rules, assuming Trump is not back in the Oval Office by then."

Meanwhile, according to Rubin, Smith's election interference case — assigned to Judge Tanya Chutkan, a Barack Obama appointee — is "widely expected to be curtailed" following the High Court's Trump v. the United States ruling.

READ MORE: 'Mass refusals to certify election' expected from officials in 3 swing states: report

"Some believe that in lieu of delving into an extensive fight over which allegations and charges can be leveled against Trump," Rubin explains, "Smith's office might first attempt to narrow its case by streamlining its indictment. That could mean substituting a new or superseding indictment for the existing one, but it's not as simple as merely preparing a revised document."

Rubin continues, "Instead, Smith would need a grand jury to review and approve such an indictment…. But in any event, the case will not be sent back to Chutkan earlier than August 2."

READ MORE: 'Weird' J.D. Vance may be 'one of the best things' Trump ever 'did for Dems'

Lisa Rubin's full MSNBC column is available at this link.