Special Counsel Jack Smith is clearly terrified of the possibility of former President Donald Trump winning immunity, as it would essentially wreck his cases against him. 

According to Fox News, Smith filed an argument against the former president's immunity claim in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

Fox News noted:

The intent of the filing was to ask for the "review of the order of the district court (Chutkan, J.) denying his motions to dismiss based on Presidential immunity and principles of double jeopardy."

"Particularly dangerous"

Smith argued that an immunity claim in the 2020 election interference case would be "particularly dangerous" as he insists Trump committed a criminal violation.

"Immunity from criminal prosecution would be particularly dangerous where, as here, the former President is alleged to have engaged in criminal conduct aimed at overturning the results of [an] election," he wrote.

Smith added, "A President who unlawfully seeks to retain power through criminal means unchecked by potential criminal prosecution could jeopardize both the Presidency itself and the very foundations of our democratic system of governance."

BREAKING: U.S. Department of Justice Special Counsel Jack Smith today filed a brief disputing former President Trump's claim to presidential immunity in the context of the 2020 election interference case in DC.

NOTE: Smith claims that granting Trump immunity from criminal… pic.twitter.com/WPYH4YzJ63

— Simon Ateba (@simonateba) December 30, 2023

In his filing, Smith accused Trump of "conspir[ing] to use knowingly false claims of election fraud with the goal of overturning the legitimate results of that election and disenfranchising millions of voters."

"For the foregoing reasons, the Court should affirm the district court’s order denying the defendant’s motions to dismiss on Presidential immunity and double-jeopardy grounds," Smith wrote.

"For the reasons given in the Government’s motion to expedite appellate review, including the imperative public importance of a prompt resolution of this case, the Government respectfully requests the Court to issue the mandate five days after the entry of judgment."

Social media reacts

Social media users had feedback for Smith after he filed to argue against Trump's immunity.

"Smith has a personal vendetta therefore he is unable to perform his duties without prejudice. Smith needs to be removed," one X user wrote.

Another X user wrote, "What about the whole thing that Jack Smith isn’t even appointed correctly as special counsel and therefore completely out of line."

The U.S. Supreme Court will ultimately decide Trump's immunity question as it relates to this case.