Special Counsel Jack Smith may not get to put former President Donald Trump on trial formally ahead of the presidential election, but he's doing the next best thing, compliments of the brief filed by the Department of Justice in the D.C. election interference case on Thursday.

When the Supreme Court issued its ruling on presidential immunity in early July, it was viewed largely as a victory for Trump, albeit not a complete one. While many on the left (including one or two on the court itself) bemoaned the ruling as essentially giving the president (specifically, that president) free rein to commit atrocities without repercussion, the ruling itself actually did no such thing.

BREAKING: Supreme Court Rules on Presidential Immunity

In a 6-3 ruling, the Court held that a former president has absolute immunity for his core constitutional powers. Further, former presidents are also entitled to at least a presumption of immunity for their official acts. However, there is no immunity for unofficial acts.

Following the ruling, the case was remanded back to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which, in turn, sent it back to U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan "for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court’s opinion." Chutkan then wasted little time in nudging the case along, setting the case for a scheduling conference and denying one of Trump's motions to dismiss.

At the scheduling conference on September 5, Chutkan set a briefing schedule on the immunity issue, ordering the Government to file its brief on September 26, despite arguments from Trump's legal team that this was inappropriate, given its proximity to the presidential election.

With DC Case Back in Her Hands, Judge Tanya Chutkan Wastes
No Time in Ruling on Trump Motions to Dismiss

New Schedule Set in Donald Trump's 2020 Election Case -
Includes Pre-Election Briefing of Immunity Issue

One of the key points argued by the attorneys Thursday morning was the timing of the briefing regarding the presidential immunity issue. As Trump's attorneys pointed out, the evidence the government intends to proffer in support of its position that Trump is not immune from the charges levied against him may well include damaging information that will then be placed in the public record just ahead of the election. Chutkan appeared unmoved by this concern and, as expected, has issued a scheduling order that sets the briefing to occur ahead of the election. 

Right on cue, late Thursday afternoon, Smith's team filed its Motion for Immunity Determinations, which one might well assume asserts all manner of dastardly deeds on the part of Trump and argues that few — if any — of them should be immune from prosecution. I say "assume" because, adding to the suspense, the motion, though filed, was not immediately available on the court's website. A glimpse at the headlines returned as search results for "Jack Smith" Thursday evening gives us an idea of the breathless anticipation surrounding the filing:

While the filing itself currently remains unavailable to the public, there was some activity on the case Friday. The Government filed a motion for leave to file an unredacted version of the motion under seal and a redacted version to be available on the public docket. 

In response, Judge Chutkan issued an order giving Trump's legal team until October 1 to file any objections to the Government's proposed redactions in the Motion for Immunity Determinations and until October 10 to file their objections to the Government's proposed redactions to the Appendix to that motion. 

In short, and reading between the lines, the prosecution's motion won't be available publicly until at least Tuesday. We will, of course, keep an eye out for it and report on its contents once it is.