Recently, Jack Smith filed a Motion for Immunity Determinations, which seeks an order that none of the conduct described therein in subject to the Presidential Immunity that the US Supreme Court, in its infinite wisdom, held attaches to official acts of the President. The motion seeks an order containing four elements:
(1) that the Government has rebutted the presumption of immunity attached to the defendant’s official communications with the Vice President;

(2) that the remaining conduct described in Section I was not official, and, in the alternative, that the Government has rebutted any presumptive immunity for any of the remaining conduct that the Court finds to be official;

(3) that the defendant is subject to trial on the superseding indictment; and

(4) that the Government is not prohibited at trial from using evidence of the conduct described in Section I, subject at a later date to non-immunity based objections and this Court’s admissibility rulings under the Federal Rules of Evidence.

Will this motion be granted by the District Court? Resolves YES if an order issues that contains all four of these elements, and/or if a docket entry states "ALLOWED" or similar. Resolves NO if an order issues that does not rule for the government on all four of these issues, and/or if a docket entry states "ALLOWED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART," or simply "DENIED," or similar.

Motion can be read here:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/3e401ee1-1a33-4961-8b15-94348d010a5f.pdf