Mon. Jul 8th, 2024

Jack Smith Should Have Waited a Week to Indict Donald Trump<!-- wp:html --><p>Photo Illustration by Elizabeth Brockway/The Daily Beast/Getty/Reuters</p> <p>I never thought I would be saying that the Justice Department should have waited before charging former President <a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/donald-trump-is-about-to-have-his-wile-e-coyote-moment">Donald Trump</a> but I’ll say it now: maybe they should have waited.</p> <p>The reason for waiting would have been the fact that on Thursday – one week after Trump was charged in Florida–the U.S. Supreme Court handed down the decision in <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2023/06/unanimous-court-holds-that-the-remedy-for-a-venue-error-is-retrial/#:~:text=In%20Smith%20v.%20United%20States,retrial%20barred%20by%20double%20jeopardy">Smith v. United States</a>, a case that decided whether the wrong choice of venue in a criminal case would not only be reversible error but also irreparable error–meaning that the case could not be re-tried in the correct venue.</p> <p>In many ways, this decision is no surprise because, as the unanimous Supreme Court opinion stated, there is no reason to treat a mistake in venue any differently than any other violation of Constitutional rights – meaning it can be remedied. Per the Smith decision, a case that resulted in conviction but was brought in the wrong venue would have to be re-tried in the right place.</p> <p><a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/jack-smith-should-have-waited-a-week-to-indict-donald-trump">Read more at The Daily Beast.</a></p><!-- /wp:html -->

Photo Illustration by Elizabeth Brockway/The Daily Beast/Getty/Reuters

I never thought I would be saying that the Justice Department should have waited before charging former President Donald Trump but I’ll say it now: maybe they should have waited.

The reason for waiting would have been the fact that on Thursday – one week after Trump was charged in Florida–the U.S. Supreme Court handed down the decision in Smith v. United States, a case that decided whether the wrong choice of venue in a criminal case would not only be reversible error but also irreparable error–meaning that the case could not be re-tried in the correct venue.

In many ways, this decision is no surprise because, as the unanimous Supreme Court opinion stated, there is no reason to treat a mistake in venue any differently than any other violation of Constitutional rights – meaning it can be remedied. Per the Smith decision, a case that resulted in conviction but was brought in the wrong venue would have to be re-tried in the right place.

Read more at The Daily Beast.

By