Jack Smith Takes a Swipe at Clarence Thomas

Special Counsel Jack Smith hit back at Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas on Friday in a new court filing, calling out Thomas for questioning Smith’s legitimacy.

Smith was appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland to head the investigations into Trump’s actions surrounding the January 6 Capitol attack. Trump has repeatedly claimed that he had presidential immunity for his activities pursued during his term in the White House. The High Court took on Trump’s case, and in its July 1 opinion ruled that he is partially immune from charges leveled against him.

In the ruling, Thomas also poked at the legitimacy of Smith’s appointment as special counsel, saying, “No former President has faced criminal prosecution for his acts while in office in the more than 200 years since the founding of our country.”

Continuing, Thomas said: “And, that is so despite numerous past Presidents taking actions that many would argue constitute crimes. If this unprecedented prosecution is to proceed, it must be conducted by someone duly authorized to do so by the American people. The lower courts should thus answer these essential questions concerning the Special Counsel’s appointment before proceeding.”

In Friday’s court filing, Smith threw a jab at Thomas, pointing out that “the Attorney General is statutorily authorized to appoint a Special Counsel.”

Newsweek has reached out to Trump’s campaign and the Supreme Court via email Friday night for comment.

In response to the Supreme Court opinion, Judge Aileen Cannon, who is overseeing Trump’s classified documents case in Florida, paused deadlines related to the case while questioning if there should be more hearings related to the court’s immunity ruling.

In Friday’s filing, Smith said, “The Government agrees to supplemental briefing on the immunity issue addressed in the Supreme Court’s opinion.”

In reaction to Smith’s filing, conservative attorney Julie Kelly said on X, formerly Twitter, “Jack Smith—who has nothing but a humiliating losing streak before SCOTUS—takes pot shots at Clarence Thomas for his concurring opinion in immunity decision that raised the unconstitutionality of Smith’s appointment.”

Kelly continued: “This is in response to Judge Cannon asking for additional briefing on immunity decision related to documents case in FLA … Of course Thomas’ opinion is relevant in this case but leave it to unaccountable, unelected, not Congress-approved dirtbags Jack Smith and Jay Bratt to argue otherwise.”

In an emailed response to Newsweek, former U.S. Attorney Barb McQuade said about Friday’s filing: “Jack Smith’s language is strong, and appropriately so, in pointing out that Justice Thomas ventured far out of his lane in opining on an issue that was not properly before the court. A concurring opinion in a case where an issue was not raised, briefed or argued has absolutely no legally binding effect on Judge Cannon, and Trump’s efforts to capitalize on it should be rejected.”

Smith has also been praised for his handling of Trump’s case by legal experts in the past. Former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance said in December, regarding Trump’s immunity claim, that Smith was handling the issue with an “outstanding move” to get it resolved quickly.

Trump has been a critic of Smith and slammed him in a post on his social media platform Truth Social on Wednesday, calling on Republicans in the House of Representatives to subpoena him.

“The House Republicans should also subpoena Deranged Jack Smith and look into his ILLEGAL INVESTIGATION of me immediately,” Trump said in the post.