"The Mueller report [was] 400 pages of we didn't find anything,' this will be 180 pages of evidence and the evidence will be powerful, undeniable and persuasive," Cobb said.

"The issue for the judge to decide is whether it infringes on official acts assigned to the presidency and whether it could chill any decision-making by the president if the areas involved cross that constitutional line."

,

As for the potential that swaths of the filing may be redacted " something suggested by the fact that there will be a private and public version of the document " Cobb said that he thinks "the bulk of the evidence will be out there for public viewing."

He added much of the evidence, like Trump's call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, is already public.

James Sample, a constitutional law professor at Hofstra University, agreed that the filing was necessary in light of "the Supreme Court's dramatic expansion of Presidential immunity," saying that "an oversized, highly detailed legal brief, detailing with as much factual specificity as is possible, is not only appropriate, but necessary."

"It is precisely because Mr. Trump, along with his nakedly partisan Supreme Court allies, has so stunningly succeeded in thwarting the truth-finding mechanism of an adversarial trial, that Jack Smith's filing is essential both for the task of categorizing official and non-official acts, but also for the filing's value in adding to the historical narrative of one of the gravest attacks on democracy in American history," Sample said."