Jack Smith is terrified the Supreme Court will take up this Trump case

Special counsel Jack Smith owns a well-earned reputation for shredding the Constitution and abusing his power.

Now Smith is facing accountability.

And Jack Smith is terrified the Supreme Court will take up this Trump case.

X asks the Supreme Court to take up key First Amendment case

Obama Judge Beryl Howell granted Jack Smith a sweeping search that allowed him access to Donald Trump’s account.

Smith then put together an enemies list of every American who commented, liked, or shared Trump’s post.

Howell then fined X $350,000 when it fought compliance on First Amendment grounds.

Now Elon Musk and X are taking their case against Smith to the Supreme Court.

X argued that Smith violated their First Amendment rights by gagging the company from notifying Trump about the January 2023 search warrant.

“In an unprecedented end-run around executive privilege, Special Counsel Jack Smith obtained a nondisclosure order preventing Twitter from notifying former President Trump of a warrant for private communications that he sent and received during his presidency,” X’s filing reads.

X argued that the D.C. Circuit Court erred in rejecting X’s petition to notify Donald Trump about Smith trying to snoop through his Twitter account – Smith got access to Trump’s draft posts and direct messages that Trump sent while President – while denying Trump the opportunity to assert executive privilege over the communications.

“The courts below rejected Twitter’s First Amendment challenge to the nondisclosure order after ordering Twitter to produce the communications without affording the former President an opportunity to assert privilege over them,” X’s petition continued on.

X argued this case raised the significant question as to whether “the First Amendment permits gagging a provider in a highly public investigation where the government does not (a) demonstrate that disclosure would jeopardize the investigation’s integrity; or (b) disprove the workability of a less-restrictive alternative.”

The company argued that the court should take up this case as it’s “an ideal vehicle to resolve these significant and recurring issues.”

X argued this case has far-reaching First Amendment implications for the entire tech sector.

“The opinion below will radically alter the constitutional landscape, ‘declar[ing] open season on’ privileged records as long as the government can find them on a Twitter (or Microsoft, Google, or Amazon) server,” X added.

The January 6 witch hunt

Smith sought Trump’s X posts as part of a desperate search to tie Trump to the events of January 6.

Smith’s case hinges on the fact that he’s arguing Trump incited what happened that day without actually charging Trump with incitement.

That’s because even Smith knows he can’t win an incitement conviction since Trump’s speech at the rally that day was Constitutionally protected.

Smith was hoping to dig up communications between Trump and the rally organizers or groups like the Proud Boys to show Trump knew his actions would inflame the situation and lead to his supporters storming the Capitol.

The Supreme Court already pumped the brakes on the January 6 case by taking up Trump’s Presidential immunity appeal.

This case also looks like another opportunity to rebuke Smith’s rogue behavior.

*Renewed Right Official Polling*

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *