Former President Donald J. Trump and his advisers have been scrambling right down to the wire to assemble a authorized crew for his first scheduled court docket look on Tuesday after being charged with mishandling categorised paperwork and obstructing the federal government’s efforts to retrieve them.

But even when Mr. Trump figures out who will represent him, the attorneys will face a extra important problem: learn how to rebut the costs in a legal case by which their choices could also be restricted.

While nobody is aware of exactly how Mr. Trump will go about attacking probably the most severe fees he has confronted, his choices for utilizing the authorized system to delay the case, flip it right into a political circus or paint himself as a sufferer of federal prosecutors are quite a few and diverse.

Even earlier than his indictment, Mr. Trump, his allies and his attorneys had hinted at a number of the arguments they might elevate.

They embody asserting that Mr. Trump had a proper to take the paperwork from the White House and that he had declassified them before leaving office. They might accuse the prosecutors of misconduct or attempt to present that he was a sufferer of selective prosecution. And they might search to have doubtlessly damning proof excluded from the trial or attempt to drive the federal government to reveal categorised materials that it desires to maintain secret.

But all of these claims could possibly be troublesome to maintain in court docket.

Samuel Buell, a former federal prosecutor and a legislation professor at Duke University, mentioned it was troublesome basically to have a federal indictment dismissed earlier than going to trial, and that Mr. Trump and his attorneys would face an uphill battle in avoiding the case shifting ahead.

“Their options here are extremely limited,” Mr. Buell mentioned, “and highly unlikely to prevent the case getting to a jury.”

The former president has lengthy used attorneys as public relations aides, deploying them to make arguments which are typically higher suited to the marketing campaign path than the courtroom. But with the stakes immeasurably larger this time, the problem will probably be to strike a stability between doing their shopper’s bidding and protecting to the foundations of legal process.

On Monday, Mr. Trump and his aides flew to Miami, the place he has a golf membership, and hunkered down to debate attainable new attorneys after James Trusty and John Rowley, the 2 who had been representing him most actively in coping with the particular counsel Jack Smith, resigned the day after charges were filed.

It stays unclear if every other attorneys would attend Tuesday’s arraignment with Todd Blanche, who’s now representing Mr. Trump in each the Florida federal case and a separate case in Manhattan associated to hush cash funds to a porn star.

Christopher M. Kise, a lawyer on Mr. Trump’s broader crew who’s licensed in Florida, and Lindsey Halligan, who can be licensed there and was in a gathering with Justice Department officers shortly earlier than the indictment was returned, are additionally prospects, an individual near his crew mentioned.

One wild card is the way in which by which arguments are dealt with by Aileen M. Cannon, the federal decide in Florida who was assigned the case and who made rulings favorable to Mr. Trump at an earlier stage within the investigation.

Still, the proof within the indictment itself is probably probably the most daunting downside dealing with no matter authorized crew Mr. Trump settles on.

Over the weekend, one Mr. Trump’s former attorneys, Timothy Parlatore, and a person who as soon as served him as lawyer common, William P. Barr, each appeared on tv stating bluntly that the 38-count indictment of Mr. Trump and considered one of his aides was extraordinarily thorough and introduced a severe risk to the previous president.

Quoting a conservative authorized knowledgeable who writes for The National Review, Mr. Barr mentioned that if even half the costs in it had been true, then Mr. Trump was “toast.”

“It’s a very detailed indictment, and it’s very, very damning,” Mr. Barr informed “Fox News Sunday.”

Many of the techniques out there to Mr. Trump’s protection have drawbacks.

For months, as Mr. Smith’s prosecutors investigated the paperwork case, Mr. Trump’s attorneys and aides have insisted that the previous president might take any paperwork he needed from the White House underneath the Presidential Records Act — a misrepresentation of the particular Watergate-era legislation.

Mr. Barr swatted apart that argument on Fox, calling it “facially ridiculous.”

“They’re the government’s documents — they’re official records,” Mr. Barr mentioned. “They’re not his personal records. Battle plans for an attack on another country or Defense Department documents about our capabilities are in no universe Donald J. Trump’s personal documents.”

Mr. Trump and his advisers have additionally repeatedly raised a separate declare: that he can’t be held accountable for having delicate data with him at Mar-a-Lago, his non-public membership and residence in Florida, or at different properties he owns, as a result of he declassified all the things earlier than he left workplace.

To the dismay of a few of his attorneys, Mr. Trump has mentioned at occasions he might declassify data mechanically, even together with his thoughts.

But a recording of him cited in the indictment undercuts that declare.

In the recording, Mr. Trump may be heard telling guests to his golf membership in Bedminster, N.J., that he needed to point out them a “highly confidential” navy plan, however was not in a position to as a result of it was “secret.” He then apparently admits the doc remained categorised — undermining the notion that he declassified all the things he had — and suggests the boundaries of his personal powers to declassify data as a former president.

“See, as president I could have declassified it,” he says. “Now I can’t.”

Several authorized specialists mentioned Mr. Trump’s attorneys would doubtless file what is named a selective prosecution movement and declare that Mr. Trump had been unfairly charged when different politicians who confronted investigation for their very own dealing with of categorised paperwork — most notably Hillary Clinton — weren’t.

Mr. Buell known as any try and make such comparisons “a total loser,” noting that Mr. Trump’s case concerned numerous categorised paperwork and important proof of obstruction — neither of which arose in the inquiry into Mrs. Clinton.

Still, Mr. Buell mentioned the attorneys would possibly pursue a selective prosecution declare “for P.R. purposes” alone.

“The politics are such that they will likely make the motion,” he mentioned.

Another movement that Mr. Trump’s attorneys would possibly try — and that Mr. Buell mentioned can be troublesome to win — is one asserting that the grand jury course of that led to the indictment was in some way marred by prosecutorial misconduct.

Mr. Trump’s authorized crew has already filed a sealed movement in Federal District Court in Washington, the place the inquiry started, requesting the entire grand jury transcripts, to search for examples of prosecutors misusing the grand jury, in response to an individual acquainted with the matter.

That movement might have been rendered moot, nevertheless, after a grand jury in Florida voted on the indictment. And, as Mr. Buell mentioned, the conventional treatment for grand jury misconduct is disciplining any attorneys concerned, not throwing out an indictment.

Two individuals acquainted with Mr. Trump’s authorized technique mentioned his attorneys might file a movement to suppress the notes that the lawyer M. Evan Corcoran manufactured from his conversations with the previous president about serving to him adjust to a federal subpoena from May 2022 demanding the return of all categorised paperwork in his possession.

The notes, a few of which Mr. Corcoran recorded on his iPhone and present Mr. Trump repeatedly making an attempt to wiggle out of the subpoena, resulted in a number of the most damaging proof contained within the indictment.

Rachel Barkow, a professor at New York University School of Law, mentioned Mr. Trump’s attorneys may need higher luck with this movement than with any of the others. She cautioned, nevertheless, that the final word success of the tactic would depend on the power of the preliminary sealed determination by Judge Beryl A. Howell in Washington to let the notes into the case by way of a provision generally known as the crime-fraud exception.

In a memo explaining why she put aside the standard protections of attorney-client privilege and granted prosecutors entry to the notes, Judge Howell mentioned that Mr. Trump doubtless misled Mr. Corcoran about steps he took to adjust to the subpoena She added the federal government had made a “prima facie” exhibiting that Mr. Trump had dedicated a legal offense, in accordance an individual briefed on what she wrote.

Among the proof Judge Howell thought of in her ruling was a transcript of the audio notes that Mr. Corcoran made describing work he carried out final June to reply to the subpoena, a key interval for investigators, in response to the particular person briefed on what she wrote. The decide reviewed the notes privately earlier than deciding whether or not to show them over to prosecutors.

Mr. Trump unsuccessfully fought in opposition to Mr. Corcoran having to supply his notes — or testify earlier than a grand jury. Mr. Corcoran, who was not accused of any wrongdoing, argued in opposition to releasing a subset of the notes as a result of they certified as an “opinion work product,” that means his personal impressions and authorized theories associated to the case; prosecutors and the decide agreed.

Even if none of those makes an attempt to derail the costs work, Ms. Barkow mentioned, they might nonetheless sufficiently delay the case from going to trial till after the election. And if Mr. Trump had been to win, he might have his new lawyer common drop the matter or even perhaps pardon himself.

“I don’t think we’ll have this case resolved before the election,” she mentioned, “and so the election may end up resolving it.”