Judge in Trump 2020 election interference case settles records, evidence to be unsealed Friday

Judge Tanya Chutkan on Thursday rejected former President Donald Trump’s request to delay the unsealing of court records and evidence in the 2020 election interference case until after the election, saying the court would release the evidence presented by the government on Friday.

In her five-page order, Chutkan said there was a presumption that there should be public access to “all aspects of criminal proceedings” and that in calling for the material to remain sealed, Trump had not made any arguments supporting any of those aspects Factors that could be taken into account are relevant. Instead, Trump’s lawyers argued that secrecy for another month would “serve other interests,” Chutkan wrote. “Ultimately, none of these arguments are convincing.”

She had been tasked with deciding whether the appendix and the brief description filed by Special Counsel Jack Smith They were due to be made available to the public earlier this month, although certain information was to be kept secret. Chutkan allowed the brief to be released last week, even though it included redactions of the names of alleged co-conspirators, campaign staffers and White House officials, as well as certain references to grand jury proceedings.

Shortly after Trump objected to further disclosures, Chutkan granted Smith’s request to place the appendix with his proposed redactions into the public record. But she also granted Trump’s request to put her decision on hold for seven days while he considered his options for further litigation.

The Special Counsel noted that much of the appendix contains sensitive materials that should be kept secret from the public. This proof, subject to a protective order The document, released at the start of the case last year, likely contains transcripts of grand jury statements and FBI interviews.

Trump’s lawyers had said that Chutkan should not allow further information to be released now, claiming in a filing that “the asymmetric release of indicted allegations and related documents during early voting creates a troubling appearance of election interference.”

Chutkan denied that this was an “asymmetrical release,” noting that the court “did not limit public access to just one side.” She said Trump was free to present his “legal arguments and substantive suggestions regarding immunity at any time before the November 7, 2024 deadline.”

She also said that the risk of affecting the election was Trump’s argument, not the court’s actions.

“If the Court withholds information that the public would otherwise have a right to access solely because of the potential political consequences of its release, that withholding could itself constitute—or appear to be—election interference,” Chutkan wrote. “The court will therefore continue to exclude political considerations from its decision-making, rather than including them at the defendant’s request.”

She said the court, in a separate order Friday, will place the appendix containing Smith’s proposed redactions into the public record.

The proceedings in the case against Trump were ongoing revived in August after the Supreme Court ruled that former presidents do so Right to some immunity from criminal charges related to official acts they carried out while in the White House.

Prosecutors requested a new charge against Trump to comply with the Supreme Court’s decision, which contained a narrower set of allegations and removed references to his conversations with Justice Department officials. The court’s conservative majority found that these interactions were off limits for prosecutors.

Trump was initially charged in August 2023 with four counts related to a plan that Smith described as undermining the transfer of power after the 2020 presidential election. The former president still faces the same four charges in the new indictment and has pleaded not guilty.

The two sides are now debating whether the conduct alleged in the weakened indictment is protected by presidential immunity, a decision that will ultimately weigh on Chutkan. Trump’s lawyers have said they will do it again try to have The entire case was dismissed due to presidential immunity and other reasons.

Robert Legare and Melissa Quinn contributed to this report.