The president-elect, Donald Trump, narrowly avoided conviction for his alleged illegal attempts to rig the 2020 presidential election, which Joe Biden won. “Sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial,” Special Counsel Jack Smith said of the evidence against Trump. However, Trump’s legal challenges ended when he was re-elected in November 2024 because of constitutional limits prohibiting a sitting president’s prosecution.
Trump has rejected Smith’s findings as “fake,” referred to the prosecutor as “deranged,” and denied any wrongdoing. Trump is expected to take office again next week after winning reelection, with the interference lawsuit and other legal matters largely resolved.
Smith stressed: “The office determined that the admissible evidence was adequate to secure and uphold a conviction at trial, but for Mr. Trump’s election [in 2024] and impending return to the presidency.”
What Did Trump Face in the Election Interference Allegations?
Trump was accused of trying to take advantage of the Capitol riot on January 6, 2021, wilfully promoting false allegations of election fraud and forcing officials to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Smith characterised Trump’s “unprecedented efforts to unlawfully retain power” as “threats and encouragement of violence against his perceived opponents” in the Department of Justice (DoJ) report, which was made public to Congress.
The conclusion of these judicial actions was the Trump reelection triumph. According to Smith’s assessment, Trump understood that the accusations of election fraud were untrue, which is why he pursued criminal charges. “Election fraud claims he knew to be false ran through Mr. Trump’s criminal efforts,” Smith wrote in a thorough report.
Was there a political motive behind the prosecution?
Smith vehemently refuted allegations that he acted for political reasons, calling Trump’s charges “laughable.” “The assertion by Mr. Trump that the [President Joe] Biden administration or other political actors influenced or directed my decisions as a prosecutor is, in a word, laughable,” he said.
In an accompanying letter, Smith reflected on the case and stated: “I think it matters that our team stood up for the rule of law, even though we could not bring the instances we charged to trial.
However, these prosecutions were eventually put on hold when Trump was re-elected, posing an unprecedented legal and constitutional issue. Following weeks of legal wrangling, the 137-page document was delivered to Congress after midnight on Tuesday. The first section of the case was eventually allowed to be released by a judge. Still, the second half—which deals with different claims regarding classified materials at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate—has not yet been decided.
How Did Trump Feel About the Report?
Trump denied the report and reaffirmed his innocence on his Truth Social platform. He teasingly responded, “THE VOTERS HAVE SPOKEN!!!” in response to Smith’s failure to take the issue to trial before the election. “The prosecutor failed to get his case tried before the election, which I won by a landslide,” Trump continued.
Which Constitutional Restrictions Were Relevant to the Case?
Smith, who took over the investigations in 2022, stressed that a sitting president could not be prosecuted under DoJ rules. His report clarifies: “The department’s view that the [US] Constitution forbids the continued indictment and prosecution of a president is categorical and does not turn on the merits of the prosecution, the gravity of the crimes charged, or the strength of the government’s proof, which the office fully supports.”
Prosecutors faced a special circumstance after Trump’s reelection, the story continues. It states that “the [2024] election results raised for the first time the question of the lawful course when a private citizen who has already been indicted is then elected president.”
What Legal Obstacles Do Trump's Associates Still Face?
Due to the case closure, Trump’s allies, Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, still deal with outstanding legal concerns. Trump’s personal assistant Nauta and Mar-a-Lago property manager De Oliveira are charged with helping Trump hide secret information.
In contrast to Trump’s case, theirs is still pending. Their attorneys contended that making Smith’s report public may taint their cases. Judge Aileen Cannon has set a hearing to decide whether the report’s second section—which focuses on these accusations—will be made public.
“The fact that we stood up for the rule of law, even in unprecedented circumstances, speaks to the integrity of this office and its commitment to justice,” Smith said, defending his team’s work.