It’s Labor Day today.

The DNC ended a week and a half ago now, and things have been fairly quiet in recent days on the political front. It is hard to imagine that the DNC could have gone better for Harris than it did, but yet she does not appear to have benefited from a post-convention polling bump. Perhaps that reflects the fact that there are fewer swayable voters now than in past generations. As a consequence, Silver’s model currently has Harris’ chances down to 44%, but I think to some extent that reflects a methodological belief that there ought to be a post-convention bump, and hence the absence of such a bump is interpreted as a bearish sign for Harris.

The first, and as of yet only, Harris-Trump debate is now 8 days away. Trump seemingly flirted with dropping out of the debate before recommitting to it. We shall see what happens on the debate stage. Notably, Harris will be meeting Trump in person for the first time at the debate.

On the day after the DNC ended, mercurial independent candidate RFK Jr. dropped out of the race and endorsed Trump. While at times earlier this year he was polling in the low to mid teens, that was largely seen as a “pox on both your houses” vote; after Biden’s replacement by Harris, RFK’s support had dwindled down to the low to mid single digits. And with his support having been ideologically diffuse, most observers feel like his withdrawal from the race is unlikely to matter much. There may be some states where his name remains on the ballot, in fact, given the lateness of his decision to leave.

Developments on the legal front have been somewhat more interesting in recent days, although we appear to be rapidly reaching the end of the “Trump’s legal jeopardy” phase of the 2024 election.

First, Special Counsel Smith had secretly empaneled a new grand jury which has now returned a superseding indictment in U.S. v. Trump (D.C. edition). Contrary to the guess of some pundits, the superseding indictment has not been expanded to include other potential defendants. Instead, the new version of the indictment removes all references to conduct that clearly represents “official acts” under the SCOTUS decision in Trump v. U.S., such as Trump’s efforts to install Jeffrey Clark as Acting Attorney General in December 2020; indeed, Clark is no longer an unindicted co-conspirator in the revised indictment. The new version still charges Trump with the same four felonies, but does so in a way that Smith believes ought to survive judicial scrutiny in light of Trump v. U.S. Judge Chutkan will hold a hearing in three days’ time, but it is conceivable that said hearing will be the last pre-election activity in this case.

Second, Smith has also recently filed his appeal with the 11th Circuit in U.S. vs. Trump (Florida edition), arguing that Judge Cannon’s dismissal of the case (on the grounds that Smith was improperly appointed) was contrary to binding SCOTUS precedent in U.S. v. Nixon, in addition to being an incorrect reading of existing law. Trump’s reply brief will be due later in September.

Finally, we are now two weeks away from when Judge Merchan had previously indicated he would rule on Trump’s post-trial motion to set aside the verdict in New York v. Trump in light of the SCOTUS ruling in Trump v. U.S., with sentencing to follow two days later if it remains necessary. There is a wide consensus that even if Merchan does sentence Trump to jail time, that sentence will be stayed pending appeal.

With the Georgia case on hold due to interlocutory appeal, it now appears that between September 18th and the election there may be no further developments of any sort in Trump’s legal woes, thus clarifying that one of the many issues on the ballot this fall is whether or not Trump’s actions around the 2020 election and his transition away from the White House will continue to be the subject of legal scrutiny.