Special counsel Jack Smith this week will be allowed to file hundreds of pages of legal arguments and evidence gathered in the 2020 election subversion and January 6 US Capitol attack criminal case against former President Donald Trump, a federal judge ruled Tuesday.

The filing is likely to be the largest chunk of the case against Trump that the public will be able to see before the 2024 presidential election, and could include what prosecutors know of the former president’s interactions with then-Vice President Mike Pence and other moments in late 2020 and early 2021.

Judge Tanya Chutkan’s decision allows the Justice Department to put into the court record parts of the investigation against Trump that are not yet publicly known.

The special counsel’s office has not been able to take Trump to trial in the year since he was charged, because of appeals, including a major Supreme Court ruling, nor finished its work in a way allowing Justice Department to release a final report.

The brief due Thursday – which is expected to exceed 200 pages, including exhibits, and is meant to convince courts Trump should be prosecuted for alleged obstruction and conspiracy criminal activity — is a rare avenue for evidence to be aired in court before a trial.

Chutkan of the DC District Court, in a six-page opinion, said she would allow such an outsized briefing because the Supreme Court, in its recent decision to give Trump’s actions while president immunity from prosecution, has directed her as the trial judge to look closely at facts in the case to decide if some allegations could move forward to trial.

The large court filing from prosecutors is set to come on Thursday. At first, it will be filed under seal. But Chutkan will have the ability to release a version of it to the public as part of the court file. The Justice Department plans to provide a redacted version that could be quickly released by the judge, likely before the November presidential election.

Smith’s office told Chutkan recently it wanted to make a “detailed” accounting of the facts of the case to the court with “substantial” evidence attached.

Trump’s team opposes that approach and wants to push the in-depth legal fight over immunity until after the election. The former president has repeatedly complained the Biden administration has weaponized the cases against him for political reasons.

Chutkan on Tuesday wrote that she needed the large amount of information from prosecutors to continue working on the case.

“A party’s factual proffer does not conclusively establish anything — it merely provides evidence for the judicial factfinder to consider,” Chutkan wrote. “The schedule reflects the court’s best judgment about how to comply efficiently with the Supreme Court’s instructions on remand.”

She added that making public evidence and legal disputes over immunity in the case wouldn’t affect witnesses’ potential testimony or the jury pool. And she said arguments Trump’s team has tried to make about a Justice Department policy not to influence campaign politics in the two months before Election Day wasn’t part of her job.

“The court need not address the substance of those claims,” she wrote. “Defendant does not explain how those putative violations cause him legal prejudice in this case, nor how this court is bound by or has jurisdiction to enforce Department of Justice policy.”