Judge Dismisses Trump’s Classified Documents Indictment
A federal judge has dismissed former President Donald Trump’s indictment in his classified documents case, finding that the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith by U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland was unconstitutional.
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon said in a ruling issued Monday that the appointment of Smith to prosecute the case ― which focuses on Trump’s retention of classified government documents after leaving the White House ― violates the appointments clause of the U.S. Constitution.
That clause gives Congress “a pivotal role” in appointing certain government positions, which “cannot be usurped by the Executive Branch or diffused elsewhere — whether in this case or another case, whether in times of heightened national need or not,” Cannon wrote.
President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, was also prosecuted by a special counsel, prompting immediate speculation from political pundits that his case could likewise be dismissed based on Cannon’s ruling.
Peter Carr, a spokesperson for Smith’s office, told HuffPost in a statement that the Justice Department has authorized the special counsel to appeal Cannon’s order.
“The dismissal of the case deviates from the uniform conclusion of all previous courts to have considered the issue that the Attorney General is statutorily authorized to appoint a Special Counsel,” Carr said.
Trump quickly celebrated Cannon’s decision in a social media post that called for all legal cases against him to be dismissed.
“Let us come together to END all Weaponization of our Justice System, and Make America Great Again!” he wrote.
Trump’s team had filed a motion earlier this month to pause the classified documents case shortly after the Supreme Court ruled that U.S. presidents have broad immunity from prosecution for official acts. Justice Clarence Thomas questioned whether Smith had been lawfully appointed in his concurring opinion.
“If this unprecedented prosecution is to proceed, it must be conducted by someone duly authorized to do so by the American people,” Thomas wrote. “The lower courts should thus answer these essential questions concerning the Special Counsel’s appointment before proceeding.”
Cannon, whom Trump appointed to the federal bench, repeatedly cited Thomas in her decision. Her ruling drew immediate praise from Republicans and condemnation from Democrats.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) called Cannon’s decision “good news for America and for the rule of law,” and said it was a “critically important step” toward unifying the country.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), in a contrasting statement, said that Cannon cannot perform her job with impartiality and should be reassigned.
“This breathtakingly misguided ruling flies in the face of long-accepted practice and repetitive judicial precedence,” Schumer said.
Michael Waldman, a constitutional lawyer and president of the Brennan Center for Justice, also likened Cannon’s handling of the case to that of “an eager member of Donald Trump’s defense team,” he told The New York Times.
Waldman pointed to Cannon’s slow pace of making decisions in the case, which critics have said is meant to prevent the case from going to trial before November’s presidential election. Waldman also said Cannon has spent time listening to “somewhat outlandish legal arguments” without resolving all of them.
Trump faced 40 charges that accused him of illegally mishandling classified records and trying to obstruct the government’s efforts to recover them from his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. He pleaded not guilty to all charges.
