District of Columbia Judge Tanya Chutkan dismissed the election interference case against President-elect Donald Trump on Nov. 25. The dismissal, entered “without prejudice,” allows the charges to potentially be refiled later. The decision followed a motion by Special Counsel Jack Smith, citing longstanding DOJ policy that prosecuting a sitting president violates the Constitution. Smith clarified the motion was not based on the case’s merits but on the temporary immunity afforded to sitting presidents.
Legal analysts suggest the charges are unlikely to resurface due to the statute of limitations expiring before Trump’s second term ends in 2029. Constitutional law expert John Shu explained that dismissing without prejudice is a standard strategy to preserve future prosecutorial options, though they may remain theoretical.
Smith’s argument focused on the DOJ’s policy for sitting presidents, distinct from immunity debates stemming from Trump v. United States. That Supreme Court decision established broad protections for presidential actions during and after office. Chutkan’s opinion emphasized the absence of prosecutorial misconduct and aligned with Smith’s interpretation of presidential immunity.
Even if Trump left office early and the case resumed, its success remains uncertain. Legal challenges had already delayed proceedings, including Trump’s objections to Smith’s appointment and statutory claims.
Meanwhile, Smith also faced setbacks in his classified documents case against Trump. Florida Judge Aileen Cannon’s ruling on the constitutionality of Smith’s appointment led to an appeal in the 11th Circuit. On Nov. 25, Smith requested to dismiss the appeal concerning Trump but maintain it for other defendants. The court granted the request on Nov. 26, and Smith’s team defended his appointment as lawful in a subsequent filing.
Also read: Trump Nominates Pam Bondi as U.S. Attorney General
