BY KATE BRUMBACK
ATLANTA (AP) — The charges against former President Donald
Trump in the Georgia election interference case seek to criminalize political
speech and advocacy conduct that the First Amendment protects, his lawyers
argued in a court filing challenging the indictment.
McAfee is forging ahead with the case even as Trump and
other defendants have said they plan to seek a ruling from the
Willis in August obtained an indictment against Trump and 18
others, accusing them of participating in a wide-ranging scheme to try to
illegally overturn the 2020 presidential election in
Four people have pleaded guilty after reaching deals with
prosecutors. Trump and the others have pleaded not guilty. No trial date has
been set, though Willis has asked that it begin in August.
Trump’s lawyers wrote in their filing that the crimes their
client is charged with fall into five separate areas: Republican elector
certificates submitted by Georgia Republicans; a request to the Georgia House
speaker to call a special legislative session; a filing in a lawsuit challenging
the 2020 presidential election; a January 2021 phone call between Trump and
Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger; and a letter sent to
Raffensperger in September 2021.
“The First Amendment, in affording the broadest protection
to political speech and discussion regarding governmental affairs, not only
embraces but encourages exactly the kind of behavior under attack in this
Indictment,” Trump’s lawyers wrote.
Prosecutors argued in response that the indictment “is based
on criminal acts, not speech.” Wherever speech is involved, they wrote, it is
“speech integral to criminal conduct, fraud, perjury, threats, criminal
solicitation, or lies that threaten to deceive and harm the government.”
Most of the charges against Shafer have to do with his
involvement in helping to organize a group of Georgia Republicans to cast
Electoral College votes for Trump even though the state’s election had been
certified in favor of Biden. The charges against him include impersonating a
public officer, forgery, false statements and writings, and attempting to file
false documents.
His lawyers wrote in a filing that prosecutors are seeking
“to punish as criminal conduct by Mr. Shafer which was lawful at the time.”
They argued that Shafer “was attempting to comply with the advice of legal
counsel” and the requirements of the Electoral Count Act.
Shafer’s lawyers also ask that three phrases be struck from
the indictment: “duly elected and qualified presidential electors,” “false
Electoral College votes” and “lawful electoral votes.” They argue that those
phrases are used to assert that the Democratic slate of electors was valid and
the Republican slate of electors in which Shafer participated was not. They
argue that those are “prejudicial legal conclusions” about issues that should
be decided by the judge or by the jury at trial.
Prosecutors argue that Shafer is using “incorrect, extrinsic
facts and legal conclusions ... to somehow suggest that he was or may have been
a lawful presidential elector at the time of the charged conduct.” They agreed
that the indictment includes “disputed” and “unproven” allegations but said
“that is not and never has been grounds for the dismissal of an indictment.”
Willis and her team experienced several setbacks in March. Although McAfee did not grant defense requests to remove her from the case, he was sharply critical of her actions and said Wade, her hand-picked lead prosecutor on the case, must step aside for Willis to continue the prosecution. Just days earlier, the judge dismissed six of the 41 counts in the indictment, including three against Trump, finding that prosecutors failed to provide enough detail about the alleged crimes.