Special Counsel Jack Smith filed a new slimmed-down version of his indictment against ex-President Donald Trump for alleged election interference in light of the Supreme Court‘s immunity decision.

The move comes after the Supreme Court in June granted the former president substantial immunity from prosecution for acts ‘core’ to his official duties.

The superseding indictment was returned by a new grand jury in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday, which had not previously heard evidence in the case.

Prosecutors write that the fresh indictment ‘reflects the government’s efforts to respect and implement the Supreme Court’s holdings and remand instructions.’

It contains the same four core charges against the former president for trying to subvert the election: Conspiracy to defraud the U.S.; conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding; obstruction of an official proceeding; and conspiracy against rights.

But it is pared down to comply with the Supreme Court ruling.

For instance, it removes the allegations of how Trump allegedly sought to use the Justice Department in his efforts to overturn the election — which was explicitly mentioned in the Supreme Court’s ruling as falling within his official duties.

The superseding indictment is 36 pages, while the original indictment was 45 pages.

In June, the Supreme Court ruled that there are limits on charging January 6 rioters with obstruction, which also impacts former President Trump’s 2020 federal election interference case.

The 6-3 decision upended hundreds of cases stemming from the January 6 riot, including Donald Trump’s election fraud trial.

The court’s ruling makes it harder for January 6 defendants to be charged with obstructing an official proceeding – which carries up to 20 years in prison.

At least 152 people have been convicted of obstructing an official proceeding, according to the Associated Press.

In all, the charge has been brought against about 350 people accused of trying to prevent Congress certifying Joe Biden’s 2020 election victory.

Justice John Roberts, who wrote the opinion, limited the ‘obstruction of Congress’ charge that has been used by the federal government to prosecute January 6 defendants.

Roberts called that law – which carries a 20-year prison sentence – ‘one of the more severe potential punishments.’

A broad interpretation of the law ‘would also criminalize a broad swath of prosaic conduct, exposing activists and lobbyists to decades in prison,’ Roberts continued.

This is a breaking news story. 

VmpQ19D4D19BqFLj5sBaztUgtSzKgqWbzvSuLfG4.png