Jack Smith has a key weapon to challenge Trump's latest bid to toss his charges: expert

A former federal prosecutor said Thursday night that the special counsel in former President Donald Trump's election subversion case may have a key response to the MAGA leader's latest attempt to have some of the charges against him dismissed.

Trump is now trying to get obstruction charges tossed from his federal election conspiracy case, arguing that the Supreme Court's recent decision in Fischer v. United States, which erased obstruction charges for January 6 rioters, also applies to him.

But that's not a done deal, former federal prosecutor Elie Honig explained to CNN's Kaitlan Collins on Thursday evening, because special counsel Jack Smith, who recently made an enormous filing detailing explosive evidence against Trump in the case, has one key way he can make a distinction between Trump and the rioters at issue in the Supreme Court's decision.

"Elie, can we just start with what they are arguing, what Trump's team is arguing here?" asked Collins. "Obviously we know what the goal is, but what's the process that they're hoping they get there by?"

ALSO READ: Revealed: Anti-Trump Larry Hogan’s ties to Project 2025 and billionaire MAGA donors

"So this is the other issue we've been very focused on for the last several days and weeks on the immunity question, which is playing out. And I know we'll talk about it in a minute," said Honig. "But what Trump's arguing today is there was another Supreme Court decision a few days before the immunity decision that said the obstruction law that was charged to get hundreds of January 6 rioters does not apply to the physical attempt to block Congress on January 6. The Court, as a result, threw out 300-plus convictions for that. And by the way, I should say, Justice Jackson, Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined with five conservatives in that ruling. So Trump's team is saying, 'A-ha,' two of the four charges against me are the same obstruction statute, therefore, it has to get thrown out."

That being said, he added, it's not quite as straightforward an argument as that — and Jack Smith has a ready-made answer.

"Jack Smith's going to say, well, your case involved fake documents, which the Supreme Court said is really the distinction, it has to involve fake documents, or Jack Smith is going to say the fake elector certificates, that keeps these charges on the books against you."

Watch the video below or at the link here.

- YouTube www.youtube.com