Special Prosecutor Jack Smith filed a superseding indictment on Tuesday in the election interference case involving former President Donald Trump.
Trump still faces three conspiracy charges and one obstruction charge, but the allegations have been narrowed.
This change was made in response to a 6-3 Supreme Court ruling that stated Trump is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for his official acts, but no immunity applies to unofficial acts.
RELATED STORY | Judge dismisses classified documents case against former President Trump
The government addressed the ruling in Tuesday's court filing.
"The superseding indictment, which was presented to a new grand jury that had not previously heard evidence in this case, reflects the Government’s efforts to respect and implement the Supreme Court’s holdings and remand instructions in Trump v. United States, 144 S. Ct. 2312 (2024)."
After the Supreme Court made its ruling in July, many legal experts said the case was weakened. However, this indictment shows that Smith believes he still has evidence to prove his case against the former president.
On Tuesday, Trump posted on Truth Social that the new indictment violated a DOJ policy against taking actions that could influence an election within 60 days of that election.
"Voting starts on September 6th, therefore the DOJ has violated its own policy – Election Interference," Trump wrote.
According to the Justice Department, the policy is not a binding rule: It "is not written or described in any Department policy or regulation."
The Justice Department has also argued in connection with the classified documents case against Trump in Florida that prosecuting an ongoing case does not violate the policy.
RELATED STORY | Judge delays sentencing in Trump's hush money case following Supreme Court's immunity ruling
Trump has pleaded not guilty in the D.C. case and is not required to appear for an arraignment on the latest indictment.
This is the second legal maneuver Smith has made this week involving Trump. On Monday, Smith filed an appeal to Judge Aileen Cannon's dismissal of the federal classified documents case. Cannon had agreed with Trump's lawyers that the Department of Justice's appointment of Smith was "unlawful" for violating the "appointments clause."
Smith argues that Cannon's decision "deviated from binding Supreme Court precedent, misconstrued the statutes that authorized the Special Counsel’s appointment, and took inadequate account of the longstanding history of Attorney General appointments of special counsels."
