The Supreme Court seriously undermined Special Counsel Jack Smith's Washington, D.C. case against former President Donald Trump when it ruled that presidents enjoy presumptive immunity for official acts.

However, that didn't stop Smith from filing a new indictment against Trump last week. One congressman says the special counsel is attempting to humiliate Trump before this year's election, and he wants answers. 

Jim Jordan questions attorney general

According to the Daily Caller, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan sent a letter on Friday to Attorney General Merrick Garland.

“@JudiciaryGOP Starts Inquiry Into Jack Smith’s Superseding Indictment Of Trump”https://t.co/r2AXNtcXHn

— Rep. Jim Jordan (@Jim_Jordan) August 30, 2024

In it, he noted that Smith filed "a superseding indictment against President Trump in an attempt to fix the constitutional defects inherent in his initial indictment."

"In doing so, however, Special Counsel Smith appears to have violated longstanding Department policy intended to protect our democratic processes," Jordan wrote.

"The Committee must therefore understand whether you approved Special Counsel Smith's indictment in advance or whether Special Counsel Smith continues to exercise prosecutorial authority without your 'meaningful direction or supervision,'" he continued.

Congressman points to DOJ policy on election-related prosecutions

The Ohio Republican went on to point out how Smith's superseding indictment came "just 10 days before early voting begins in some states."

"There can be little question that the superseding indictment has some effect on the election, especially coming after the Supreme Court’s opinion on presidential immunity cast significant doubt on Special Counsel Smith’s ability to prosecute the initial indictment," Jordan went on to declare.

He then demanded records of all communications with Smith's office "referring or relating to the superseding indictment filed against President Trump on August 27, 2024."

Jordan also asked Garland if he personally approved the new indictment and whether he evaluated it "in the context of the Department's longstanding policy counseling against prosecutorial action so near an election."

Jordan says it is "difficult to believe" Smith isn't trying to sway election

As he drew to a close, the conservative lawmaker remarked that "[t]here is no persuasive argument why Special Counsel Smith could not wait until after the election to file this superseding indictment."

"It is therefore difficult to believe that the superseding indictment was filed now for any purpose other than to affect the outcome of the election," he concluded.

Jordan requested that all relevant material be furnished to the House Judiciary Committee as soon as possible and no later than September 13.