By
Welcome to this week’s edition of the Deadline: Legal Newsletter, a roundup of top legal stories, including the latest developments from the Supreme Court, Donald Trump’s legal cases and more. Click here to have the newsletter delivered straight to your inbox every Friday this Supreme Court term.
It was a big week for the Donald Trump disqualification storyline. Maine joined Colorado as the second state to find the former president constitutionally ineligible to take office again. Following the Colorado Supreme Court ruling last week, Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows on Thursday also said Trump can’t appear on the state’s primary ballot. But like the Colorado high court ruling, which is on hold pending a U.S. Supreme Court appeal, Bellows put her decision on ice pending any state court challenge.
Hours after the Maine decision, California’s secretary of state declined to keep Trump off the state’s list of primary candidates. That follows the Michigan Supreme Court earlier this week declining to hear a Trump eligibility case — but like the Minnesota Supreme Court’s order in November that effectively kept Trump on that state’s primary ballot, Michigan did not grapple with the key constitutional issues addressed in Maine and Colorado.
Colorado’s state GOP has already petitioned the Supreme Court justices to review the decision disqualifying Trump. We don’t know if or when the nation’s high court will take up the appeal, and Trump may file his own petition soon as well. But clearly the 14th Amendment issue isn’t going away, so the justices should settle it nationwide — and soon.
Jack Smith’s team didn’t take the holiday week off in D.C. The special counsel is still filling the district court docket, this week lodging what’s called a motion in limine. Latin for “at the threshold,” such motions are routine filings seeking to address issues ahead of trial. With this one, Smith wants to make sure Trump can’t “turn the courtroom into a forum in which he propagates irrelevant disinformation,” citing the former president’s quest to infuse the case with “partisan political attacks and irrelevant and prejudicial issues that have no place in a jury trial.”
Don’t expect a ruling on this motion or anything else from U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan until Trump’s immunity appeal is resolved. But the government wants to do everything it can to move the case forward ahead of the scheduled March trial, which is increasingly less likely to start on time. Following the Supreme Court’s rejection of Smith’s leapfrog petition last week, the immunity issue is pending in the D.C. Circuit, with oral argument set for Jan. 9. Though the justices declined to intervene early, the eventual loser in the D.C. Circuit — which, as MSNBC Daily columnist Jessica Levinson explains, will likely be Trump — may well be asking them again to get involved in 2024.
If you’re looking for some New Year’s Eve reading, Smith’s D.C. Circuit response to Trump’s immunity claim is due on the docket Saturday. For particularly voracious legal eagles, we’re also expecting Chief Justice John Roberts’ year-end report for 2023. Hopefully it’s a better read than last year’s offering, which, as I wrote then, left significant room for improvement.
The justices return to the bench for oral arguments Jan. 8, heading into a presidential election year with opinions due on crucial issues including abortion and voting rights, and with rulings on Trump’s eligibility and immunity possibly to come.