Former Prosecutor Expects Trump Lawyer’s Promised Court Maneuvers Will All Fail


Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor, shared on X (the platform formerly called Twitter) this week a dismal (for Trump) perspective on the chance for success of a series of court motions that a lawyer for the former president announced intentions to file. The context is the ongoing federal case against the ex-White House occupant related to his attempts to stay in power after the last presidential election despite his documented loss to Joe Biden.

John Lauro, the Trump lawyer, said during Monday proceedings related to scheduling the trial date that he intended to bring a motion alleging selective prosecution, a filing evidently claiming executive immunity, and motions “to dismiss each conspiracy count,” reporter Kyle Cheney explained. Those prospective filings would be in addition to any push for a change of venue for the handling of the case, for which Trump has been pushing. Proving selective prosecution would presumably require showing substantially similar acts by other political figures, and it’s just unclear there’s any legal precedent at all in U.S. history for the basic, often uncontested facts of the totality of what Trump did.

And claims related to privilege or special status already failed to effectuate much of a long-term change in the handling of what became Trump’s other federal criminal case, which relates to his harboring of government documents from his time in office.

“None of those motions have any serious chance of being granted,” Mariotti remarked, discussing Trump’s lawyer’s push. “They’re more about delay and an opportunity to put a story out to the public and the judge.”

Carissa Byrne Hessick, a criminal law professor in North Carolina, also commented online on this specific matter. “Anyone who knows anything about prosecutorial power knows that Trump’s motion to dismiss the J6 case on grounds of selective prosecution will fail,” the professor predicted. “And thanks to United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456 (1996), there’s basically a 0% chance he’ll get an evidentiary hearing.” Even Trump’s clamoring in the so-called court of public opinion doesn’t have great prospects, considering the recent poll data showing more said the charges make them less likely to vote for Donald compared to those saying they were more likely.