Jack Smith urges swift and ‘definitive’ action from the Supreme Court on Trump’s immunity claim

Less than 24 hours after Donald Trump’s attorneys told the US Supreme Court to reject a fast-tracked consideration of his “presidential immunity” defence, special counsel Jack Smith urged the justices for an “immediate” review and a “definitive” decision.

A filing with the nation’s highest court on Thursday responds to the former president’s attempts to slow down the special counsel’s appeal that asks the justices for the final word on whether he can claim “immunity” from prosecution in a federal election conspiracy case.

The federal judge overseeing the case has rejected those arguments, and Mr Trump has vowed to appeal.

Mr Trump “agrees that the question whether a former President of the United States enjoys absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for a conspiracy to overturn an election, and thereby prevent the lawful winner from taking office, is an issue of great constitutional moment,” prosecutors with Mr Smith’s office wrote in the filing.

But the frontrunner for the 2024 Republican nomination for president is “incorrect” to believe that the nation’s highest court “should wait” to weigh in, they wrote.

“This court’s immediate review of that question is the only way to achieve its timely and definitive resolution,” they added. “The public interest in a prompt resolution of this case favors an immediate, definitive decision by this court. The charges here are of the utmost gravity. This case involves – for the first time in our nation’s history – criminal charges against a former president based on his actions while in office.”

And “not just any actions,” they added.

A federal grand jury indictment charges Mr Trump with conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding and conspiracy against rights.

Those charges are based on Mr Trump’s alleged acts to “perpetuate himself in power by frustrating the constitutionally prescribed process for certifying the lawful winner of an election,” Mr Smith wrote.

“Respondent stands accused of serious crimes because the grand jury followed the facts and applied the law,” the filing added, in closing. “The government seeks this court’s resolution of the immunity claim so that those charges may be promptly resolved, whatever the result.”

Prosecutors have argued that the former president relied on knowingly false claims about the election to pressure state officials to approve fraudulent slates of electors to obstruct the certification of the results, then attempted to persuade then-Vice President Mike Pence to refuse the outcome, and, ultimately, failed to dissuade a mob of his supporters from rioting at the US Capitol on January 6.

Mr Trump’s campaign has also vowed to appeal an historic decision from the Colorado Supreme Court that disqualifies him from state ballots in 2024 because of his role in the attack.

A ruling from the state’s highest court on Tuesday cites his ineligibility under the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution, which prohibits candidates who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” from holding public office.

The cases before the Supreme Court could inject serious constitutional questions into the 2024 presidential race, with the potential to upend Mr Trump’s campaign, who has launched a violent warpath accusing his political rivals of trying to derail his path to the White House.