Special counsel Jack Smith has formally requested a federal judge to dismiss the election interference case against Donald Trump following his victory in the 2024 presidential election. In court documents filed Monday, Smith argued that the Justice Department’s longstanding policy prohibits the prosecution of a sitting president, citing constitutional immunity.

Trump, who was charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States and other offenses related to alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, pleaded not guilty earlier this year.

Smith’s filing states:

“As a result of the election held on November 5, 2024, the defendant, Donald J. Trump, will be inaugurated as President on January 20, 2025. It has long been the position of the Department of Justice that the United States Constitution forbids the federal indictment and subsequent criminal prosecution of a sitting President.”

He clarified that the dismissal request is not a reflection on the merits of the case:

“This outcome is not based on the merits or strength of the case against the defendant.”

Trump’s spokesperson Steven Cheung hailed the request as a “major victory for the rule of law.”

“The American People re-elected President Trump with an overwhelming mandate to Make America Great Again,” said Cheung. “The American People and President Trump want an immediate end to the political weaponization of our justice system and we look forward to uniting our country.”

The dismissal request adds to the legal complexities surrounding Trump’s return to the White House. Sentencing in Trump’s New York criminal case has been delayed indefinitely, and another federal case involving classified documents is also expected to face dismissal under the same immunity principles.

Smith’s decision to seek dismissal underscores the constitutional challenges of prosecuting a sitting president. It also raises questions about the future of federal cases involving Trump and the broader implications of presidential immunity on accountability and the justice system.

Google has reacted strongly to reports that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) may propose forcing the tech giant to sell its Chrome browser as part of antitrust remedies. The DOJ is expected to present its final recommendations to a judge this week in response to an August ruling that deemed Google a monopoly in online search.

Bloomberg reported the DOJ might also push for new restrictions on Google’s artificial intelligence (AI), Android operating system, and data usage practices. In a statement, Google executive Lee-Anne Mulholland criticized the proposal, saying, “The DOJ continues to push a radical agenda that goes far beyond the legal issues in this case.”

Mulholland warned that such measures would harm consumers, developers, and U.S. technological leadership at a critical time for innovation.

Chrome is the dominant web browser worldwide, commanding 64.61% of the global market as of October, according to Similarweb. Google’s search engine, with an estimated 90% global market share, benefits significantly from being the default search option in Chrome and other browsers, such as Safari on iPhones.

Judge Amit Mehta previously described default search engine agreements as “extremely valuable real estate” for Google, noting that competitors would need to spend billions to secure similar deals.

The DOJ has hinted at potentially breaking up Google to address concerns over its ability to leverage products like Chrome, the Play Store, and Android to maintain its search monopoly. Final proposals are expected to include remedies aimed at limiting Google’s dominance across multiple platforms.

Google remains firm in its opposition, maintaining that the proposed measures would negatively impact users and innovation. The outcome of the DOJ’s recommendations will shape the future of antitrust enforcement in the tech industry.

Switzerland and Italy have been compelled to redraw sections of their shared border in the Alps due to the ongoing effects of melting glaciers, driven by climate change. The revised boundary will affect areas near the iconic Matterhorn, one of Europe’s highest peaks, and regions close to well-known ski resorts such as Zermatt.

The Swiss-Italian border is traditionally defined by glacier ridgelines or perpetual snow areas. However, as glaciers shrink, these natural demarcations have shifted, prompting both nations to adjust the border accordingly. A draft agreement was reached in May 2023 by a joint commission, and Switzerland officially approved the changes last Friday, with Italy’s final approval still pending.

The new borders, which will impact locations like Plateau Rosa, the Carrel refuge, and Gobba di Rollin, aim to address the practical needs of both countries, particularly in terms of maintaining natural areas. The clarified boundaries will also help resolve responsibility for managing these regions as the landscape continues to evolve.

Melting glaciers have revealed a number of surprising discoveries in recent years, including the remains of a German climber missing since 1986, found last July near the Matterhorn. Such discoveries highlight the rapid rate at which the glaciers are retreating and the broader impacts of climate change on the region.