Jack Smith Compares Donald Trump to Enron CEO in New Filing

Special Counsel Jack Smith wants to use a questionnaire for jurors in the classified documents case against Donald Trump in Florida, citing a 2010 ruling against Jeffrey Skilling, the former CEO of Enron.

Trump has been indicted on 40 felony charges in Florida for allegedly mishandling classified documents after he left the White House—separate charges for each of the 32 documents and eight other charges that include making false statements and engaging in a conspiracy to obstruct justice. The former president has pleaded not guilty to each charge, as he has in all of the criminal cases against him.

Smith filed a motion for a written questionnaire to be completed by potential jurors ahead of jury selection in the Florida case because of the "pre-trial publicity surrounding this case." He has argued for a questionnaire agreed upon by both Smith and Trump's respective legal teams to be submitted before February 2, in what he says is in the interest of providing sufficient time before the May trial date for jury selection to take place.

Smith's filing says Trump's team opposes the motion because it is "before the Court has ruled on discovery demands or other motions," meaning it will take up too much of their time before the court rules on already filed motions.

Newsweek reached out to a member of Trump's legal team via email for comment.

In his motion, Smith compared the Trump case to that of Skilling, the former CEO of energy and commodities company Enron.

Once one of the biggest firms in the United States, widespread fraud within the company revealed in October 2001 brought it all crashing down. Enron eventually filed for bankruptcy at a sum of $63.4 billion.

Skilling was at the center of the storm. In 2006, he was sentenced to over 34 years in jail on counts of insider trading, securities fraud, and making false statements due to continually misleading investors, the U.S. government, and others over the status of Enron's finances.

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear two questions from Skilling's defense team in 2009. One of the questions—was Skilling properly charged with conspiracy—resulted in a 9-0 decision in 2010 in favor of Skilling and his conviction was overturned and sentence reduced.

But it's another question that Smith's team cited in their motion. The Supreme Court had also looked at whether "pretrial publicity and community prejudice" stopped Skilling from receiving a fair trial.

Smith argues a written questionnaire was sufficient in providing a high-profile case with a fair jury. Skilling's team unsuccessfully argued the case being tried in Houston—where the company was based—prevented them from having a fair trial.

Back in 2010, the 6-3 decision went against Skilling. In her opinion, the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the argument that a fair jury could not be sought in Houston "is hard to sustain." Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented and said the jury was likely not free from the "deep-seated animosity that pervaded the community at large."

Ginsburg argued that some of the acquittals Skilling received in the trial meant the jury was capable of "weighing the evidence impartially" and as such, it is at the center of Smith's argument in the Trump Florida case 13 years later.

Ginsburg also referenced the jury selection process, a "77-question, 14-page document was designed to probe potential jurors' exposure to pretrial publicity" in an attempt to weed out biases. This was done through "careful consideration of the questionnaires" and through "focusing on questionnaire answers that raised a red flag signaling possible bias."

Ginsburg ruled she was satisfied that this was a thorough process for selecting a jury in such a high-profile case.

Earlier this month, Trump lawyers filed a motion with a federal judge to grant them access to redacted documents in response to the government filing to submit them in this form instead of retracting them altogether. This is known as "graymail," when lawyers request the government hand over information in the hope charges will be dismissed by prosecutors in the interest of withholding national secrets.