Donald Trump’s recent victory in the presidential election marked not just a political achievement but a significant moment in American legal history. By becoming the first former president to win a presidential election while under felony conviction, Trump has effectively shielded himself from potential legal repercussions stemming from multiple criminal investigations, including those led by special counsel Jack Smith. His success has meant that ongoing cases related to the 2020 election and the classified documents he possessed are likely to stall or become moot as he steps back into the role of president. This unprecedented scenario has created a unique legal landscape, wherein Trump appears to leverage the powers of his new position to insulate himself from justice.
Jack Smith’s efforts to hold Trump accountable for alleged election interference and the mishandling of classified documents will likely grind to a halt with Trump’s ascendance to the White House. As Trump prepares to take office, he has pledged to oust Smith from his position, potentially allowing him to dismiss the federal charges against him entirely. Legal experts now speculate whether Smith will take any last-minute actions, such as revealing undisclosed information or advancing his cases before Trump can implement his plans. Meanwhile, dates set by the courts for Trump’s cases remain in limbo, as defense attorneys may argue for delays or dismissals given the president-elect’s newfound power.
In Georgia, where Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis has charged Trump with trying to overturn the election results, the situation is equally convoluted. The case was already on hold due to allegations of conflict involving Willis and a member of her team, freezing proceedings and leaving the path to prosecution unclear. Courts tend to grant presidents broad immunity from prosecution while in office, further complicating Willis’s ability to move forward with her charges. Even if the case were to resume, Trump could successfully argue for its dismissal or a prolongation due to his presidential status, potentially allowing him to escape serious legal consequences for his actions during the 2020 election.
In New York, Trump’s conviction on charges related to his 2016 hush money scheme also presents a significant challenge for the judiciary. As Justice Juan Merchan prepares to hand down a sentence, Trump’s legal team is likely to argue that holding him accountable while he transitions into the presidency would be unprecedented and improper. The complexities of sentencing a president-elect underscore broader questions about legal accountability in American politics, as Trump’s lawyers may seek to defer any punishment until after his term, raising issues of fairness and legality in adjudicating such high-profile cases.
Beyond criminal proceedings, Trump faces a substantial array of civil liabilities, amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars, which he may now try to stave off using his presidential authority. His past experience navigating civil judgments, including a costly settlement for misuse of the Trump Foundation, suggests he may attempt to argue that ongoing lawsuits impede his executive functions. Notably, judgments like those from E. Jean Carroll, who successfully sued Trump for defamation and sexual abuse, pose significant financial challenges. However, without presidential immunity from civil penalties, Trump’s strategy might revolve around leveraging office power to negotiate or delay proceedings.
Trump’s return to the presidency thus represents a crossroads for his legal challenges, with broad implications for accountability in American governance. As he uses the powers of office both to secure a political base and evade legal penalty, questions arise about the capacity of the system to regulate leaders’ conduct. If elections can serve as a shield from accountability for egregious behavior, the repercussions may extend beyond Trump’s personal circumstances and challenge the fundamental principles of justice and governance in the United States. The unfolding legal dynamics bear watching as they could redefine the relationship between the presidency and the rule of law.