The decision to dismiss special counsel Jack Smith’s case against President-elect Donald Trump has left a lingering question: could Trump face prosecution after his presidency? According to MSNBC legal analyst Kristy Greenberg, Smith’s filing suggests this possibility remains on the table, setting up a potential legal battle for the post-Trump era.
Smith’s motion to dismiss acknowledges constitutional constraints on prosecuting a sitting president, citing Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinions that bar such actions. However, as Greenberg highlighted, the motion’s language stops short of a permanent resolution.
Smith’s filing specifically notes that immunity for a sitting president is temporary and does not preclude prosecution after their term concludes or if they are removed from office through resignation or impeachment.
This distinction is critical. By requesting dismissal without prejudice, Smith preserves the legal option to revisit charges against Trump in the future. Whether this remains a theoretical possibility or a roadmap for future action could depend on political and legal dynamics after Trump’s presidency.
Greenberg pointed out another layer of complexity: the statute of limitations. The legal time frame for prosecuting certain alleged offenses could expire during Trump’s second term, raising questions about whether the clock on prosecution would effectively pause while he holds office. Legal experts will likely debate whether these charges can be tolled—or extended—under such circumstances.
Trump’s re-election brings an additional variable into play: the role of his incoming attorney general. A new AG, loyal to Trump, could take the position that the case should be dismissed with prejudice, effectively barring it from being revived after his presidency. Such a move would solidify Trump’s legal position and neutralize any lingering threat from Smith’s team. Greenberg noted this scenario as a likely consideration for Trump’s legal strategy.
Smith’s election interference case has been mired in legal complexities and delays, including Trump’s successful appeal to the Supreme Court, which ruled that former presidents enjoy immunity for official acts. Smith’s subsequent effort to bring a superseding indictment, alleging that Trump acted outside his official duties, failed to gain traction before the election.
Judge Tanya Chutkan’s role could also prove pivotal. If she delays a ruling on the motion, as Greenberg speculated, Trump’s administration could exert significant influence over the case’s trajectory, potentially pushing for a more definitive resolution in Trump’s favor.
The dismissal has been framed by Trump and his supporters as a vindication and a step toward ending what they see as the politicization of the justice system. Trump’s communications director, Steven Cheung, characterized the decision as a victory for the rule of law and an opportunity for national unity. However, Smith’s decision to leave the door open for future prosecution underscores the lingering political and legal tension surrounding Trump’s presidency.
