Former President Donald Trump's legal team has invoked the character of the Grinch in a court filing, comparing Special Counsel Jack Smith to the holiday curmudgeon as they oppose his request for an expedited appeal. The appeal concerns whether Trump can claim presidential immunity in a criminal case accusing him of attempting to unlawfully remain in power after his 2020 election loss.

In their court filing to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Trump's attorneys argued against Smith's proposed schedule, stating that it would require them to work through the holidays, disrupting family and travel plans. They likened Smith's proposal to the Grinch's attempt to sabotage Christmas, quoting Dr. Seuss' "How the Grinch Stole Christmas" by saying, "I must find some way to keep Christmas from coming...But how?" It is a clear reference to Smith's alleged obstruction in the case.

Peter Carr, a spokesperson for Smith's office, declined to comment on the comparison.

Prosecutors, who filed their response to Trump's legal arguments on Wednesday, pointed out that Trump's attorneys had miscalculated the filing deadline, stating it would be due on December 23, not December 26. However, they focused on prioritizing a speedy resolution of the case, emphasizing that the public's need for a prompt decision overrode personal scheduling issues.

Trump's lawyers urged the court not to rush a decision on the immunity issue, stating that the case raised novel, complex, and sensitive questions that go to the core of the American system of separated powers. They argued that the court should carefully consider these important legal issues with the utmost care and diligence.

Furthermore, Trump's legal team asserted that Smith's request for expedited consideration was solely aimed at preserving the March 4 trial date, which the defense considers unrealistic due to the extensive discovery process and the complex legal questions surrounding the prosecution of a former president. The defense claimed that the prosecution's goal was to unlawfully attempt to try and convict Trump before the 2024 presidential election, thereby interfering with the democratic process and disenfranchising his supporters.

Trump, who has pleaded not guilty in the case, faces a separate appeal regarding a gag order barring him from attacking potential witnesses. His attorneys argued for a trial delay until after the November election, but a panel of D.C. Court of Appeals judges rejected their proposal last week and ruled in Smith's favor.

Smith's filing stressed the importance of expediting the appeal to ensure a timely trial, noting that trial proceedings are currently suspended pending the resolution of the appeal. Smith's team argued that expedited consideration would serve the public's interest without compromising the parties' ability to address the appeal's issues thoroughly.

In addition to seeking an expedited appeal before the appeals court, Smith has requested to have the case heard directly by the Supreme Court. The uncertainty surrounding the trial's timeline raises questions about the possibility of Trump being tried if he were to win the 2024 election.

With the legal battle intensifying, all eyes are now on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit as it weighs the arguments presented by Trump's lawyers and Special Counsel Jack Smith. The outcome of this case will undoubtedly have far-reaching implications for the legal boundaries of presidential immunity and the future of Trump's political career.