Donald Trump will “very swiftly” see his attempt to claim legal immunity for acts committed during his presidency dismissed by a top Washington court, a former Trump White House lawyer said.
“So Jack Smith has a winner on this one, right?” Jim Schultz told CNN, referring to the special counsel investigating Trump for election subversion, who on Saturday asked the US court of appeals for the District of Columbia circuit to reject Trump’s claim.
Schultz added: “The supreme court rejected the idea of expediting this, but it still goes to the DC circuit court. And it’s common knowledge in the legal community [that] DC circuit court is kind of the warm-up act for the supreme court. A lot of supreme court justices have come from the DC circuit.
“And this is the right tribunal to be hearing it. And I think in this instance the DC circuit court is going to act swiftly. And I think they’re going to knock down this immunity claim … very swiftly.”
Lawyers for Trump were due to file a written brief on Tuesday. Oral arguments are scheduled for next week.
Trump faces four federal charges related to attempted election subversion culminating in the January 6 attack on Congress, as well as 13 state election subversion charges, in Georgia.
Smith also indicted Trump on 40 counts related to the retention of classified information, and the former president faces 34 New York charges related to hush-money payments to an adult film actor who claimed a sexual encounter with him.
The former president also faces civil cases over his business affairs and a defamation claim arising from a rape allegation a judge called “substantially true”.
Regardless, he dominates Republican primary polling, capitalising on legal threats also including being barred from the ballot in Colorado and Maine for inciting an insurrection.
Depending on readings of the 14th amendment to the US constitution, those cases are also set to be decided by the supreme court.
Schultz, a Pennsylvania lawyer who was an associate White House counsel, told CNN that lawyers for Trump would “make the arguments … that the 14th amendment does not apply to the president of the United States.
“That is, there are a number of specific officials that are named in that section, one of them does not include the president of the United States. I think that’s going to be the basis upon which they make this appeal. And I do believe that the United States supreme court is going to agree with the Trump team on this one at least.”
Last week, Steven Portnoy of ABC News examined records of debate over the 14th amendment, which was ratified in 1868, after the civil war and to apply to former Confederates.
Reverdy Johnson, a Maryland senator, asked why the text of section three did not mention the presidency or vice-presidency.
Lot Morrill, from Maine, said: “Let me call the senator’s attention to the words ‘or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States.’”
That, Portnoy wrote, “end[ed] the discussion on that point”.
