January 6 evidence against Trump may be released before election after judge’s decision

Prosecutors may release never-before-seen evidence in the federal election interference case against Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump ahead of the November presidential election, according to a schedule laid out Thursday in federal court.

Under the timeline, special counsel Jack Smith’s office will file evidentiary disclosures on September 10 and supporting materials for its arguments around presidential immunity by September 26.

Those disclosures could include grand jury transcripts and other materials that were not included in the initial indictment. It has the potential to impact the 2024 race and shed new light on the 2020 campaign and the January 6, 2021 insurrection.

The schedule largely sides with the special counsel’s proposed timeline for the trial.

In federal court on Thursday, Smith’s team said they wanted to file an initial brief that included “substantial exhibits”.

The evidence may not immediately be fully public after it’s submitted. Some of it may re under seal.

Thursday’s hearing was tense between Trump’s lawyers, federal prosecutors and Judge Tanya Chutkan who is overseeing the federal election interference trial.

John Lauro, the former president’s lawyer, pushed back on Judge Chutkan’s proposed schedule, reminding her that the next two months were going to be “sensitive.”

“It strikes me that what you’re trying to do is affect the presentation of evidence in this case in a way so as not to impinge on the election of the president,” Judge Chutkan told Lauro. “This court is not concerned with the electoral schedule.”

Already the federal election interference case has been delayed months because of the former president’s appeals.

One of the disputes on Thursday was Smith’s office request that Judge Chuktan resolve the question about boundaries around Trump’s immunity.

In July, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that presidents enjoy immunity from criminal prosecution regarding their core powers – or powers awarded to the president by the Constitution – and some official acts. But, the court did not clarify what those official acts are. It will be up to Judge Chutkan to decide.

Lauro argued that the indictment is flawed because the grand jury heard evidence that included Trump’s conversations with former Vice President Mike Pence, which they believe is part of the protected acts.