Judge Chutkan Warns Trump Lawyers In Order Responding To Demand She Step Down From Jan. 6 Case
Federal District Judge Tanya Chutkan warned Trump attorneys in an order responding to ex-President Donald Trump’s motion demanding she step down from the trial on charges of conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of an attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights.
On Monday, Trump attorneys filed a motion demanding Judge Chutkan recuse herself on the basis of statements she made while sentencing other defendants who participated in the January 6 attack on the Capitol. The filing reads, in part:
In making these statements, Judge Chutkan agreed with portions of defendant Palmer’s sentencing memorandum, which similarly (and wrongly) placed blame on President Trump and complained that he had not been charged. No. 1:21-cr-00328-TSC, ECF #31 at 8–9 (Sentencing Memorandum) ([Palmer Defense Counsel]: “Those voices, including the voice of the then-president himself, had convinced persons such as Mr. Palmer that the election was fraudulent and that they must take action to stop the transition of the presidency. . . . While many of the people who participated in the Capitol riot will be going to prison, the architects of that horrific event will likely never be charged with any criminal offense.”).
Although Judge Chutkan correctly noted that she does not have any influence on charging decisions, her above comments stating “you have made a very good point . . . that the people who exhorted you and encouraged you and rallied you to go and take action and to fight have not been charged” and “you have a point, that the people who may be the people who planned this and funded it and encouraged it haven’t been charged, but that’s not a reason for you to get a lower sentence” reflect her apparent opinion that President Trump’s conduct: (1) occurred, and (2) supports charges (otherwise, she would not have characterized the point as “very good.”). Similarly, Judge Chutkan’s statement that “I have my opinions” suggests that in her view—formed almost two years before the initiation of this matter—President Trump should be charged.
Following that motion, Judge Chutkan issued an order demanding Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team file any opposition within three days and warning Trump’s lawyers to give Smith notice before filing such a motion or risk having future motions “denied without prejudice”:
MINUTE ORDER as to DONALD J. TRUMP: Upon consideration of Defendant’s 50 Motion for Recusal, it is hereby ORDERED that the government shall file any opposition no later than September 14, 2023, and the defense shall file any reply within three calendar days from the filing date of the government’s opposition. All other deadlines set by the court remain in effect. Defense counsel is reminded of the requirement to confer with opposing counsel before filing any motion and to indicate whether the motion is opposed. See 09/05/2023 Second Minute Order. Future motions that fail to comply with that requirement may be denied without prejudice. Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 9/11/2023.
The Judge’s order also points out that the issue has no effect on any other deadlines the court has set.
