Defense Attorney for Donald Trump Claims Georgia Trial Would Constitute Election Interference

Donald Trump's defense attorney, Steven Sadow, asserted during a recent court appearance in Fulton County, Ga., that holding a trial for the former president in 2024 would amount to election interference. Sadow, making his first appearance in a motions hearing, argued that such a trial during the election season would be 'the most effective election interference in the history of the United States.' He emphasized the potential impact on Trump's ability to campaign for the presidency, advocating for a fair chance and suggesting that no trial date should be set until the Republican nomination is determined and other court cases involving Trump are concluded.

In response to inquiries about the potential progression of Donald Trump's trial if he is elected president, Steven Sadow, Trump's defense attorney, stated that the trial would not proceed until after his term in office. However, Nathan Wade, an attorney for Willis' office, countered that the trial's continuation is not equivalent to election interference. Wade emphasized that the proceedings are part of Fulton County's ongoing business and asserted that it would not hinder Trump's campaign or pursuit of office.

Steven Sadow, Trump's defense attorney, indicated that if Donald Trump is not selected as the nominee, there would be no grounds to postpone the trial. While Sadow did not reiterate arguments put forth by other defense attorneys, he did emphasize that Trump's alleged involvement in a conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election results is protected by the First Amendment.

The defense team underscored the unprecedented nature of the indictment, branding it as unconstitutional. However, Will Wooten, Fulton County deputy district attorney, countered that the defense has not identified any specific statute being unconstitutionally applied. Addressing the argument that this prosecution is the first of its kind, Wooten pointed out that it corresponds to the unique circumstances of a criminal enterprise attempting to overturn election results, asserting that such novelty doesn't render it unconstitutional.

Judge Scott McAfee has expressed skepticism regarding District Attorney Fani Willis' proposal to try all defendants in the extensive RICO case together. Playfully suggesting an "A-league" and "B-league" division for the defendants, McAfee noted that the prosecution would have the statutory right to choose the placement of each defendant. While indicating that approximately eight defendants could be tried together, McAfee clarified that the number is not set in stone.