‘Democrat clown’: Internet divided as Jack Smith urges Supreme Court to reject Donald Trump's presidential immunity claim

WASHINGTON, DC: Special counsel Jack Smith urged the Supreme Court to deny former President Donald Trump's presidential immunity claims and stop him from causing more delays to the election interference case trial in Washington DC, The Hill reported.

Smith, in his filing made on Monday, April 8, argued the GOP presumptive nominee's claims of his immunity from criminal prosecution over his actions on January 6, 2021, when he allegedly instigated the Capitol Hill attack to overturn the 2020 election result, contradicted the US Constitution.

In the 66-page legal filing, Smith argued that "a bedrock principle of our constitutional order is that no person is above the law — including the president," as per The Independent.

"The Constitution does not give a president the power to conspire to defraud the United States in the certification of presidential-election results, obstruct proceedings for doing so or deprive voters of the effect of their votes," the filing read.

Jack Smith argues Constitution framers never supported criminal immunity

"The former president's constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed does not entail a general right to violate them," the special counsel wrote in the filing.

He further argued that Trump used his official powers as "an additional means of achieving a private aim" and therefore, should face prosecution even if the court ensures him a level of immunity.

"The Framers never endorsed criminal immunity for a former President, and all Presidents from the Founding to the modern era have known that after leaving office they faced potential criminal liability for official acts," Smith emphasized.

The Supreme Court in late February agreed to hear Trump's immunity claims after two lower courts rejected to grant him the same. The oral argument will start on April 25, with the final decision to be announced by the end of June.

SCOTUS' decision to hear the claims delayed the election subversion case trial, which was scheduled to start in early March.

If Trump wins in November, he could easily have the federal charges against him dropped by appointing an attorney general. Trump was indicted with four federal charges in August 2023 for allegedly trying to overturn the 2020 presidential election, which President Joe Biden won.

Jack Smith's request splits Internet

Social media users responded with divided opinions about Smith urging the top court to reject the former president's immunity claim. While some lashed out at the special counsel, another group supported him.

One user wrote, "Jack Smith is a communist Democrat clown who has no idea how the law works he's only been weaponized by Joe Biden's doj because Democrats can't win elections fair and square."

On the other hand, another remarked, "Jack Smith lays his case out so simply and clearly that SCOTUS…or even a child could understand it. A president is not a King."

"Jack's chasing Trump as if the Constitution were his personal Choose Your Own Adventure book. Spoiler alert: There's no 'immunity' ending. #RuleOfLaw?" a third user wrote.

Whereas a fourth response read, "The Supreme court should never have heard this case. It’s a delay tactic and waste of time."

Someone else added, "Smith's stance underscores the importance of upholding the rule of law for all, regardless of position."

Whereas an individual argued Smith's move as "Election interference by Biden DOJ."

"Giving inmunity to this freak is not only killing democracy but sending the worst WRONG SIGNAL to our military leaders!!!" read one remark.

While another slammed the special counsel, saying, "Jack Smith is a political hack who is using his position to attack the man who not only won in 2020 but will also win again in 2024, all at Biden's behest. He is Biden's lapdog!"

This article contains remarks made on the Internet by individual people and organizations. MEAWW cannot confirm them independently and does not support claims or opinions being made online.