[ad_1]
- U.S. District Judge Eileen Cannon has not ruled on proposed jury instructions that echo President Trump’s claims that he converted classified records into personal documents, but prosecutors have threatened to appeal.
- The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed two previous Cannon decisions regarding reviews of documents seized at Mar-a-Lago.
- Another dispute concerns whether to release the names of witnesses in the case before trial, which prosecutors have warned could lead to intimidation and harassment.
Prosecutors and judges in Donald Trump’s classified documents case are not on good terms.
Mr. Cannon and Mr. Smith were at odds even as U.S. District Judge Eileen Cannon sided with Justice Department Special Counsel Jack Smith on Thursday and rejected President Trump’s proposal to dismiss the classified document storage charge. It seemed like he was doing it. The Trump-appointed judge called Smith’s related request “unprecedented and unwarranted,” and pointedly noted that Smith was free to appeal if he didn’t like the decision.
Mr. Smith threatened to have a federal appeals court reconsider Mr. Cannon’s proposed trial, arguing that the jury instructions were incorrect and too favorable to Mr. Trump.
The dispute marks at least the fourth standoff between prosecutors and judges in the high-profile case, with Cannon already overturned twice by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Legal experts say Mr. Smith The court may have to ask the appeals court to reconsider Cannon’s proposed jury instructions, since the trial sided with Trump.
Preparing to vote: See who’s running for president and compare their positions on important issues with our voter guide
Even more provocative is Mr. Smith’s attempt to remove Mr. Cannon from the case, an unusual move that some legal experts say is justified. If the judge is replaced, the trial could be postponed until after the November election.
President Trump faces 40 charges for allegedly preserving defense documents and concealing about 100 classified records at his Mar-a-Lago resort after leaving the White House. . He pleaded not guilty.
What role does the Presidential Records Act play in this case?
This showdown focuses on the Presidential Records Act (PRA). This is a law enacted after the Watergate scandal that specifies that nearly all presidential documents be kept in the National Archives as government property after the end of the administration. An exception is personal records such as birthday cards.
President Trump has argued that any disputes should be handled in civil court under the PRA rather than criminal charges because he converted classified records into personal documents before leaving the White House in 2021. Trump has previously claimed, without evidence, that documents the FBI found at Mar-a-Lago may have been planted there by government agents.
Prosecutors said the PRA had nothing to do with the incident and charged him with 32 counts of “intentionally preserving” and “failing to deliver” national defense documents, in violation of the Espionage Act. Cannon refused Thursday to dismiss his charges, ruling that the charges “make no reference to the Presidential Records Act and rely on that law for the purpose of stating the crimes.”
Dispute over Presidential Records Act could lead to new appeals
The lingering controversy surrounding the PRA is that Cannon asked prosecutors and defense attorneys to consider two possible jury instructions for the trial. Both of Cannon’s proposals reflect Trump’s positions, including one that says courts and juries cannot review the president’s decision to classify administrative records as “private.” Stated.
Mr Smith asked Mr Cannon to decide his position on the PRA “promptly”, which Mr Cannon did. But she declined to finalize her instructions to the jury before Trump’s defense makes its case at trial. Finalizing jury instructions before the defense’s presentation would be an “unprecedented injustice,” Cannon wrote.
Regarding jury instructions, Cannon responded in Thursday’s order that “the parties remain free to utilize any appellate options they see fit to invoke.”
Some legal experts said Mr. Smith should ask the appeals court to reconsider Mr. Cannon’s lack of jury instructions.
Neil Katyal, a former acting U.S. attorney general, said Smith had no choice but to ask the appeals court to review his proposed jury instructions.
“Judge Cannon rejects President Trump’s False Presidential Records Act defense, but only for now.” Katyal wrote to X. “I don’t think Smith has any choice but to go to the 11th Circuit and ask for a new trial.”
Former U.S. attorney Joyce Vance White suggested that Smith’s best strategy may be to ask Cannon to withdraw from the case. “It goes off the rails quickly.”
“The normal rules don’t seem to apply.” she wrote to x.
Federal appeals courts have already overturned Cannon twice.
Prosecutors have already questioned 11 people.th The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has already intervened several times.
After the FBI seized classified records at Mar-a-Lago in August 2022, Judge Cannon ordered a former judge known as the Special Master to scrutinize the documents for potential private records. As a result, investigators were temporarily unable to conduct an investigation.
Prosecutors said the seizure was made pursuant to a valid search warrant. Defendants typically cannot review evidence after a seizure, but they may challenge the evidence at trial.
The appeals court initially reversed part of Cannon’s order, allowing the agency to continue examining the documents during a special master review. The appeals panel called Trump’s claims that the records were declassified and made personal under the PRA a “red red herring.”
“In any case, at least for these purposes, the declassification argument is a red herring, because declassification of official documents does not change or make them personal.” said the committee.
The Supreme Court declined to consider the decision.
The Court of Appeals subsequently reversed Cannon’s order to the Special Master and halted the review altogether.
A three-judge panel of the 11th Circuit ruled that “the law is clear.” “You can’t write a rule that allows the subject of a search warrant to block a government investigation after the warrant is executed, and you can’t write a rule that only allows former presidents to do that.”
President Trump praised Cannon, calling him a “smart and courageous judge whose words of wisdom rang true across the nation.”
Prosecutors oppose Cannon’s move to release names of witnesses
Another conflict between Mr. Smith and Mr. Cannon erupted on February 6, when Mr. Smith ordered the release of the names of witnesses in the case at Mr. Trump’s request.
Cannon refused the government’s request to redact witness names and statements to the FBI or grand jury from publicly filed documents in the case.
But Smith argued on February 8 that releasing their names could expose witnesses to intimidation and harassment, as has happened in other Trump cases.
Judges have issued a gag order over President Trump’s comments to witnesses in a New York civil case, a New York criminal case, and a federal election interference case in Washington, D.C. Civil case judge Arthur Engoron received a bomb threat at his home. received. The judge in the other federal case, Tanya Chutkan, received death threats.
“There is a well-documented pattern of intimidation, harassment, and intimidation of judges, attorneys, prosecutors, and witnesses involved in cases involving Mr. Trump,” prosecutors wrote.
The dispute remains unresolved. So far, Canon has not released the name. Legal experts say Mr. Smith may appeal the move to name the witnesses.
[ad_2]
Source link
