Judge Tanya Chutkan appears set to release the contents of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s immunity opus, possibly in the days before voters decide whether to return President Trump to the White House.

The drama over the book-length brief will escalate on Tuesday, when Trump owes Judge Chutkan his suggestions for which material ought to be redacted. The special counsel has already provided the jurist with the government’s notions of what is appropriate for public consumption. 

Judge Chutkan’s briefing schedule — she has set another deadline for the 45th president to suggest redactions, on October 10 — telegraphs that she has decided that the brief, the summation of Mr. Smith’s case against Trump, will reach the public in some form. She and the parties have already laid eyes on the filing, though it is under seal. Trump calls it a “monstrosity” and a “false political hit job.”

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Trump v. United States that official presidential acts are presumptively immune was a signature victory for the 45th president in his effort to foil Mr. Smith’s January 6 prosecution. It came after Judge Chutkan and the District of Columbia Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals both reckoned that Trump was unprotected by any immunity. 

Since the Nine handed down that ruling, though, Trump has suffered one defeat after another at Judge Chutkan’s courtroom. First, she denied his request to dismiss the case as selective and vindictive. The jurist also granted Mr. Smith’s request to submit one giant brief on immunity and approved the special counsel’s request to be allowed to quadruple the page limit for briefs in federal court. Trump opposed that grant, too.

The 45th president calls Mr. Smith’s brief “fundamentally unfair” and crafted in service of a “politically motivated agenda,” meaning that its purpose is to influence the election. Trump alleges that a brief so close to the vote violates the Department of Justice’s policies with respect to election interference. Judge Chutkan lambasted his argument for “incoherence” and reckons that those guidelines are not within her purview.

The DOJ mandates that its prosecutors “may never select the timing of investigative steps or criminal charges for the purpose of affecting any election, or for the purpose of giving an advantage or disadvantage to any candidate or political party.” Another informal rule warns that prosecutors “should not take any action that will influence an election within 60 days of that election.” 

Mr. Smith’s new and slimmed-down indictment in this case was docketed about 70 days before the election, and the government argues that once charges are filed, the rules against election interference are no longer in force. Trump, though, argued on Truth Social that the special counsel has “violated” this prohibition and that he has “been informed by my attorneys, that you’re not even allowed to bring cases literally right before an Election – A direct assault on Democracy.”        

Judge Chutkan appears unbothered by the election’s proximity. She  announced the October schedule in what is called a “minute order,” simple instructions that are used to announce scheduling and other litigation tasks. The format suggests that she does not intend to dilate on her reasons for crafting a schedule that contemplates the brief’s release, in some form, in the days before the election on November 5. 

The contents of the brief could put Trump on a defensive footing. Mr. Smith writes that his document includes “quotations or summaries of information” adduced from confidential or sensitive sources such as “grand jury transcripts, interview reports, or material obtained through sealed search warrants.” Some of that evidence could be gleaned from the testimonies of Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and Vice President Pence. 

The special counsel has broadcast that the brief will also comprise “additional unpled categories of evidence that the Government intends to introduce at trial” and “a substantial amount of Sensitive Material.” Trump reckons that Mr. Smith’s opus is “tantamount to a premature and improper special counsel report,” albeit one released before a jury has heard evidence or brought in a verdict.

Judge Chutkan maintains that she “need not address the substance” of Trump’s election interference claims because “concern with the political consequences of these proceedings does not bear on the pretrial schedule.” His response to Mr. Smith’s brief is due three weeks before Election Day.