This week, Special Counsel Jack Smith filed two motions in the DC election interference case against former President Donald Trump. The case, which has drawn much attention, increasingly seems to be centered on Trump’s speech and legal counsel, reports Above the Law.
In the first motion, the government requested that prospective jurors be handed written questionnaires three weeks prior to the trial. This move, aimed at streamlining the process and eliminating disqualified jurors early on, was met with resistance. The objection from Trump’s side seems directed more towards the proposed “reasonable and standard restrictions to protect jurors,” than the overall process.
The government cited sensitivities surrounding the case, including trump’s alleged use of social media for the intimidation of court proceedings. The request includes an order to forbid the defense team from accessing potential jurors’ social profiles and a ban on disclosing the jurors’ identities. These requests came in the context of a proposed gag order already under discussion.
The second motion, filled by the government, requested that Trump disclose within the next two months if he plans on presenting an advice of counsel defense, a claim repeatedly made by his lawyer, John Lauro. This move is not uncommon, with some judges enforcing declamation of affirmative defenses before trial.
However, in this case, the defense’s strategy seems hardly secretive. Lauro has made several television appearances advocating that Trump was acting under the advice of counsel. If Trump asserts this defense, the government would gain the ability to depose several witnesses and access their communications, which until now, were protected under attorney-client privilege.
This case continues to unfold, with both sides utilizing unique, and at times, controversial tactics. The legal community eagerly awaits further developments and the eventual trial.