US 司法（官） Department 勧めるs 裁判官 not to 延期する Trump 文書s 裁判，公判
The US 司法（官） Department 勧めるd a 裁判官 on Thursday to 拒絶する Donald Trump’s 成果／努力s to 延期する his 分類するd 文書s 裁判，公判, 説 there was no basis for an “open-ended” 延期する sought by his lawyers.
連邦の 検察官，検事s last month 提案するd a December 11 裁判，公判 for Mr Trump, who is 告発（する），告訴（する）／料金d with 37 重罪 counts 関係のある to the mishandling of 分類するd 文書s at his 損なう-a-Lago 広い地所, though the actual date will be up to the 裁判官.
Mr Trump’s lawyers 反対するd this week with a request for a 延期する. They did not 提案する a 明確な／細部 date but said the 事例／患者 関心d novel 合法的な 問題／発行するs, and 訴訟／進行 with a 裁判，公判 within six months is “不当な” and would “result in a miscarriage of 司法（官）.”
On Thursday, 検察官，検事s on special counsel Jack Smith’s team 答える／応じるd by asking US 地区 裁判官 Aileen 大砲 to not 延期する the 裁判，公判 beyond the December date they recommended.
They 拒絶するd the idea that any of the 合法的な arguments the defence ーするつもりであるs to raise 要求するs 延期 of the 裁判，公判, 説 they have already produced 大陪審 transcripts and unclassified 証言，証人／目撃する 声明s.
They said that in the next week, they will produce 証言，証人／目撃する 声明s for interviews 行為／行うd through to June 23, or two weeks after the 起訴，告発 was returned.
A 裁判官 has been 勧めるd by the US 司法（官） Department to 拒絶する Donald Trump´s 成果／努力s to 延期する his 分類するd 文書s 裁判，公判 (John Locher/AP/PA)
Though the defence lawyers had said a continuance was necessary because they had not yet received 分類するd 証拠 in the 事例／患者, 検察官，検事s 公式文書，認めるd that as of Thursday, only two of the lawyers have submitted an 使用／適用 for a 安全 通関手続き／一掃 that would enable them to 接近 such 証拠.
Defence lawyers had also argued that Mr Trump’s busy （選挙などの）運動をする schedule for the 2024 共和国の／共和党の 指名／任命 needed to be taken into account in scheduling a 裁判，公判. But 検察官，検事s said that, too, was not a basis for an 不明確な／無期限の 延期する.
“Many 起訴するd 被告s have 需要・要求するing 職業s that 要求する a かなりの 量 of their time and energy, or a 重要な 量 of travel,” they wrote.
The 司法（官） Department also 論争d the 示唆するd that an impartial 陪審／陪審員団 could not be selected before the 大統領の 選挙.
“Our 陪審／陪審員団 system relies on the 法廷，裁判所’s 当局 to （手先の）技術 a 徹底的な and 効果的な 陪審／陪審員団 選択 過程, and on 見込みのある 賠審員s’ ability and 乗り気 to dec ide 事例／患者s based on the 証拠 現在のd to them, guided by 合法的な 指示／教授／教育s from the 法廷，裁判所,” the 検察官，検事s wrote.
“To be sure,” they 追加するd, “the 政府 readily 認めるs that 陪審／陪審員団 選択 here may 長所 付加 議定書s (such as a questionnaire) and may be more time-消費するing than in other 事例／患者s, but those are 推論する／理由s to start the 過程 sooner rather than later.”
