Donald Trump is set to be arraigned on Thursday afternoon blocks from the site of the January 6th insurrection. Although this is his third indictment, this specific case has loomed large over all of his other legal troubles.
As expected, the former President and his legal team have already begun to hit back against the charges, and Trump will no doubt plead not guilty in court today. But what does it mean to have the Republican frontrunner facing three indictments, one of them for trying to overturn the U.S. election? And, more importantly, what comes next?
Suggested Reading
The Root spoke to legal and political experts to try to find out.
On Wednesday, Trumpβs attorney John Lauro sat down with NPR News to discuss his legal strategy, and his responses were... illuminating. Lauro repeatedly asserted that Trumpβs actions, including pressuring the Vice President to violate his constitutional duty to certify the election, were protected by free speech.
Elizabeth Beske, a Constitutional Law Professor at American University, says thatβs not how free speech work. βIt doesnβt hold up,β says Beske. β Lots of crimes involve speechβlike fraud.β
For example, says Beske, βIf I promise to sell you prime beachfront property, and after taking your money, hand over the deed to a rat-infested swamp, I have defrauded you. That my promise was oral doesnβt confer First Amendment protection on my lies or prevent my prosecution.β
In the indictment, Special Counsel Jack Smith provides ample evidence that Trump was knowingly perpetuating a lie. But instead of backing down, Smith says that Trump did everything in his power to stay in office, including pressuring Mike Pence to violate his constitutional duty, opening a βshamβ justice department investigation, organizing a fraudulent slate of electors to vote for him in states he lost, and directing an angry mob to disrupt the certification process.
βThe indictment makes clear that Trump was free to say wrong things and even to say untruthful things,β says Beske. βWhat makes it criminal is that he used knowing falsehoods in an effort to derail the election certification and throw out legitimate votes.β
Legal issues aside for the moment, what does all of this mean politically? Itβs a little too early to know exactly how voters are reacting to Trumpβs latest indictment. But we can look at polling from the last two indictments to give us a hint. Trump has repeatedly gotten a boost in his poll numbers after each indictment. And the most recent numbers the New York Times/ Sienna Poll show Trump towering over his primary opponents with a 37 percentage lead over the next closest candidate, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. The poll also found that Trump was neck and neck with President Joe Biden in general election match-ups.
Nina Smith, a campaign strategist and former senior advisor to former Georgia Gubnetrorial candidate Stacey Abrams, says she thinks Republican voters will end-up pulling the lever for Trump. βHeβs essentially become Teflon Don in the Republican primary,β she says. βBut if weβre thinking about the general election, itβs going to have consequences.β
Smith says that these indictments make him a significantly weaker general election candidate. βHow do you justify to independents or even get crossover Democrats to vote for you if you have this indictment hanging over your head,β she says. Especially because if heβs convicted in a state court, thereβs no possibility of a self-pardon.
Now that weβve opened-up the self-pardon can of worms, itβs worth talking about the multiple legal scenarios stemming from a frontrunner facing decades of prison time for attempting to overturnΒ an election.
This is the easy scenario because the prosecutions all theoretically continue as normal (or as normal as anything involving Donald Trump possibly can be.)
Itβs not clear if a sitting President can be prosecuted by the Justice Department, says Beske. β[Two Justice Department] memos suggest that thereβs an internal DOJ policy that a sitting President cannot be prosecuted during their time in office,β she says. βThe theory is that it would prevent them from exercising their constitutional role.β
The rule isnβt legally binding, but with Trump in control of the Justice Department in this scenario, itβs seems even less likely that weβd see the prosecution continue (at least while heβs in office.) And if he fails to derail the prosecution, thereβs always the chance that he tries to pardon himself for the federal crimes. Although Beske calls that a legal βgray area,β adding that he would have zero power to pardon himself for state crimes.
βHe could still be a convicted felon and run for election and win,β says Beske βThereβs nothing that says you cannot be a convicted felon.β
In fact, he could even be President from behind bars. βThereβs nothing in the constitution that says he canβt,β says Beske, adding that this would undoubtedly βprovoke a constitutional crisisβ about whether or not the constitution requires his release in-order for him to fulfill his duties in office.
These are βunprecedented legal issues,β says Former San Francisco Prosecutor Paul Henderson. Although Trumpβs best bet is to win the election, itβs unclear what happens after that. βNone of this prevent him becoming the nominee and none of it prevents him from being the President,β he says. βBut itβll be an interesting dynamic to see... if he wins and heβs sentenced what happens to that [prison] time. Does he serve time? Is he President while in custody?β
Straight From
Sign up for our free daily newsletter.