Current:Home > NewsSpecial counsel Jack Smith argues Judge Tanya Chutkan shouldn't recuse herself in Trump case -Aspire Money Growth
Special counsel Jack Smith argues Judge Tanya Chutkan shouldn't recuse herself in Trump case
View
Date:2025-04-17 23:00:23
Washington — Special counsel Jack Smith filed a blistering motion in response to former President Donald Trump's request that the judge overseeing his federal 2020 election interference criminal case recuse herself.
"There is no valid basis, under the relevant law and facts, for the Honorable Tanya S. Chutkan, United States District Judge for the District of Columbia, to disqualify herself in this proceeding," Smith wrote in a 20-page filing an hour before a deadline set by Chutkan to respond.
- Trump's 4 indictments in detail: A quick-look guide to charges, trial dates and key players for each case
He said that in seeking Chutkan's recusal, Trump "both takes out of context the Court's words from prior judicial proceedings and misstates the proper legal standards governing judicial recusals."
Smith also argued that Trump "cherry-picks" from two of Chutkan's sentencing hearings for two Capitol riot defendants, and in both cases, "the Court was appropriately responding to—and ultimately rejecting— a common argument raised by scores of January 6 offenders: that they deserved leniency because their actions were inspired by, or were not as serious as, those of others who contributed to the riot but had not been held responsible—including former president Donald J. Trump, the defendant in this case."
Trump's lawyers asked in a filing Monday that Chutkan remove herself from the case because of previous statements she had made in two separate Capitol riot sentencing hearings.
"Judge Chutkan has, in connection with other cases, suggested that President Trump should be prosecuted and imprisoned," Trump's lawyers wrote in their request. "Such statements, made before this case began and without due process, are inherently disqualifying."
They highlighted statements she made about the former president, including telling one Capitol riot defendant in October 2022 that the violent attempt to overthrow the government came from "blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day."
"The public meaning of this statement is inescapable — President Trump is free, but should not be," Trump's attorneys wrote.
But in his filing, Smith provided more extensive transcripts of the remarks Judge Chutkan had made in the two Capitol riot sentencing hearings to make the argument that the full transcripts show that she "did not state that [Trump] was legally or morally culpable for the events of January 6 or that he deserved punishment," but rather, that "the Court was engaged in its judicial responsibility to hear, acknowledge, and respond to [the Jan. 6 defendant's] sentencing allocution."
Addressing the emphasis placed by Trump's recusal motion on this phrase, "it's a blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day," Smith wrote, "From this simple statement of uncontroverted fact, the defendant purports to draw the 'inescapable' message that the Court believes that defendant Trump should be imprisoned. But the only inescapable thing about the Court's comment is that it stated an uncontested and accurate fact in response to a mitigation argument that the Court had heard many times before."
Smith argued Trump has not proven Chutkan made biased claims because he "must show that they display a deep-seated animosity toward him."
"The defendant cannot meet this heavy burden," Smith wrote.
"Because the defendant cannot point to any statements expressing actual bias, all he can say—and he says it repeatedly—is that the Court's comments 'suggest' some sort of bias or prejudice toward the defendant," Smith added.
Ultimately, it is up to Chutkan to decide whether her past statements create the perception of bias. A new judge would be assigned to the case if she recuses. Trump's attorneys could petition an appeals court to require her to recuse, but such efforts are often not successful.
Trump will be able to respond to Smith's counter-argument, and his deadline to do so is next week.
Fin Gomez and Graham Kates contributed to this report.
- In:
- Donald Trump
- United States Department of Justice
- Jack Smith
Caitlin Yilek is a politics reporter for CBS News Digital. Reach her at [email protected]. Follow her on Twitter: https://twitter.com/hausofcait
TwitterveryGood! (52)
Related
- Warm inflation data keep S&P 500, Dow, Nasdaq under wraps before Fed meeting next week
- Texas jurors are deciding if a student’s parents are liable in a deadly 2018 school shooting
- Make eye exams part of the back-to-school checklist. Your kids and their teachers will thank you
- Tropical Storm Ernesto sends powerful swells, rip currents to US East Coast
- Angelina Jolie nearly fainted making Maria Callas movie: 'My body wasn’t strong enough'
- New York's beloved bodega cats bring sense of calm to fast-paced city
- New Jersey man sentenced to 7 years in arson, antisemitic graffiti cases
- Key police testimony caps first week of ex-politician’s trial in Las Vegas reporter’s death
- US appeals court rejects Nasdaq’s diversity rules for company boards
- Stunning change at Rutgers: Pat Hobbs out as athletics director
Ranking
- Megan Fox's ex Brian Austin Green tells Machine Gun Kelly to 'grow up'
- When does 'Emily in Paris' Season 4 Part 2 come out? Release date, how to watch new episodes
- Mississippi poultry plant settles with OSHA after teen’s 2023 death
- Kate Spade Outlet Sparkles with Up to 73% off (Plus an Extra 15%) – $57 Bags, $33 Wristlets & More
- The Best Stocking Stuffers Under $25
- A banner year for data breaches: Cybersecurity expert shows how to protect your privacy
- ‘Alien: Romulus’ bites off $41.5 million to top box office charts
- South Carolina prosecutors plan to seek death penalty in trial of man accused of killing 5
Recommendation
US appeals court rejects Nasdaq’s diversity rules for company boards
San Francisco goes after websites that make AI deepfake nudes of women and girls
A Florida couple won $3,300 at the casino. Two men then followed them home and shot them.
Sydney Sweeney's Cheeky Thirst Trap Is Immaculate
Could Bill Belichick, Robert Kraft reunite? Maybe in Pro Football Hall of Fame's 2026 class
Lawyers for plaintiffs in NCAA compensation case unload on opposition to deal
Landon Donovan named San Diego Wave FC interim coach
Harris Stirs Hope for a New Chapter in Climate Action