Image: from Mario Nawfal X @MarioNawfal
By Open Chronicle Staff with Agencies | Tuesday, March 10, 2026
MIAMI — In a high-stakes legal maneuver that directly challenges the impartiality of the current administration, voting technology giant Smartmatic filed a motion Tuesday to dismiss federal bribery and money laundering charges, characterizing the prosecution as a politically motivated “campaign of retribution.”
The filing in Miami federal court marks the first major corporate pushback against what Smartmatic describes as the weaponization of the Department of Justice (DOJ) to bolster the President’s long-standing, unproven claims regarding the 2020 election.
A “Vengeful” Reversal
The case centers on an October 2025 indictment of Smartmatic’s parent company, SGO Corporation Limited, for alleged bribes paid to election officials in the Philippines nearly a decade ago. While the Biden-era DOJ had previously indicted individual executives in 2024, it notably declined to charge the company itself.
Smartmatic’s attorneys argue that the decision to pursue the corporation, making it the first business in 15 years to be indicted under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), only occurred after the change in administration.
“The only consequential changes in this case since 2024 were the President, his DOJ, and their well-documented crusade to unconstitutionally target their perceived political enemies,” the company stated in its motion.
The Retribution Narrative
Smartmatic has been a central fixture in the “rigged election” narrative championed by the White House and its allies. The company highlights several key factors to support its claim of “vindictive and selective prosecution”:
-
The Defamation Context: Smartmatic is currently pursuing a $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit against Fox News and several high-profile allies of the President. The company suggests the criminal indictment is designed to aid these allies in their legal defense.
-
DOJ Leadership: The motion points to the role of Attorney General Pam Bondi and Miami U.S. Attorney Jason Reding Quinoñes, alleging they abandoned settlement negotiations to pursue an indictment that aligns with the President’s public rhetoric.
-
Selective Enforcement: Attorneys argued that while the DOJ has shuttered other long-standing overseas bribery investigations in the past year, it has uniquely escalated the case against Smartmatic.
Precedent and “Regularity”
While motions for vindictive prosecution are historically “long shots,” Smartmatic’s legal team is betting on a shifting judicial mood. The filing notes that federal judges have increasingly questioned whether the administration is entitled to the “presumption of regularity”, the doctrine that assumes the government is acting in good faith.
The motion likens their situation to other recent cases, such as that of Kilmar Armando Ábrego García, where defendants successfully argued that DOJ actions were motivated by discriminatory or retributive intent.
The White House Silence
As of Tuesday afternoon, the White House has not formally responded to the allegations. The DOJ declined to comment, citing ongoing litigation.
If the motion is granted, it could lead to the dismissal of all charges with prejudice. At a minimum, Smartmatic is seeking “discovery”, the right to access internal DOJ communications to determine if the White House directly influenced the decision to indict.