Posted on 07/21/23
| News Source: The Hill
Prosecutors appear to be eyeing one unexpected charge as the Justice Department winds down its investigation into former President Trump’s effort to stay in power after the 2020 election.
Trump announced Tuesday he had received a target letter Sunday informing him he is the subject of the probe, a move often followed by the filing of charges.
Reporting indicates that among the three statutes cited in the target letter are those for conspiracy to defraud the United States as well as obstruction of an official proceeding.
One would address the Trump campaign’s efforts to submit fake election certificates declaring Trump the victor while the other was used against several rioters, including members of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers.
But a third statute referenced in the target letter deals with conspiring to deprive citizens the “free exercise” of constitutional rights like voting — a surprise to those looking to surmise potential charges.
The inclusion of the statute, Section 241 of the criminal code, provides an alternative to taking the riskier path of charging Trump under the Insurrection Act, another law drafted as a response to the Civil War.
Norm Eisen, who served as counsel during Trump’s first impeachment and worked alongside fellow former prosecutors in drafting a model prosecution memo for charges against Trump, said special counsel Jack Smith and his team may have thought the Insurrection Act “might be a bridge too far and presented a problem.”
“Smith has offered an elegant solution,” he said.
The law that Smith turns to was crafted in the Reconstruction era, when Black Americans were facing an explosion of violence targeting them as they sought to exercise the right to vote. The law carries up to 10 years in prison for those convicted.
But the law is not limited to any one group or set of rights. And unlike the rarely touched Insurrection Act, it has been used recently.
“It has been used, even in the 20th century, on several occasions or cases that were upheld at various appellate court levels, in cases that involved acts of what we might think of as voter fraud, or conspiracies to commit some kind of voter fraud. And the theory that the statute was used under in those cases is that every voter has a right to an honest count in elections,” said Josh Stanton, an attorney with Perry Law who worked on memos analyzing the Jan. 6 case.
How Smith intends to use the statute, Stanton said, depends on “what basis of facts will be used to bring the charge.”
Eisen likewise said Smith has a number of potential options — ones that include focusing on the rights of various actors that day.
“The most likely theory that Smith is pursuing under 241 is that Trump and co-conspirators like [attorney John] Eastman, who applied pressure to Mike Pence to disrupt the Jan. 6 counting the electoral votes, are interfering with the right of all Americans who voted for Joe Biden to have their vote counted,” he said.