Chuck Darwin<p>
Judge <a href="https://c.im/tags/Aileen" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Aileen</span></a> M. <a href="https://c.im/tags/Cannon" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Cannon</span></a>’s stunning dismissal this week of the most serious charges faced by Donald Trump put her on shaky legal ground, according to experts, </p><p>who say she is🔸 on track to be reversed on appeal<br>🔸 and could even be removed from the case<br> — an extraordinary, but not unheard of step.<br>
Because of the political calendar, however, any legal repercussions could be short-lived.<br>
Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified national security records and obstruction of government efforts to retrieve the material <br>🔸may not matter if the former president and current Republican nominee is elected in November. </p><p>If he gets back to the White House, Trump could pressure his Justice Department to close the case. </p><p>He could also promote Cannon to the very appeals court that will soon examine her decision to toss the case.
Cannon’s finding that special counsel <a href="https://c.im/tags/Jack" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Jack</span></a> <a href="https://c.im/tags/Smith" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Smith</span></a> was improperly appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland to investigate Trump <br>conflicts with numerous past court decisions and the nation’s long history <br>— during both Democratic and Republican administrations <br>— of allowing <a href="https://c.im/tags/independent" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>independent</span></a> <a href="https://c.im/tags/prosecutors" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>prosecutors</span></a> to handle high-profile instances of alleged wrongdoing.
⭐️Smith has filed notice of his plans to appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, <br>which reviews decisions from the Florida district where Cannon, <br>a relatively inexperienced judge appointed by Trump in 2020, sits.</p><p>⭐️The court has already rebuked her twice for her handling of other aspects of the classified documents case, <br>sending what Yale Law School professor Akhil Amar described as a message that her decisions had been “way out of line.”<br>
The question now, Amar said, is <br>💥how quickly and dramatically the appeals court acts on the latest ruling, 💥<br>which dismissed the entire indictment for Trump and his two co-defendants.<br>
“They may not want to stick their head in a <a href="https://c.im/tags/buzz" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>buzz</span></a> <a href="https://c.im/tags/saw" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>saw</span></a> if they can just let the case take its slow, deliberative course,” he said.<br>
In her 93-page decision, Cannon said there is no specific statute authorizing the attorney general to appoint a special counsel. </p><p>She also said the Constitution requires someone with Smith’s authority to be confirmed by the Senate.<br>
The judge acknowledged the tradition of special-attorney-like figures in moments of political scandal involving high-level government officials, <br>from <a href="https://c.im/tags/Watergate" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Watergate</span></a> to <a href="https://c.im/tags/Iran" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Iran</span></a>-<a href="https://c.im/tags/contra" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>contra</span></a> to Russia’s attempts to <a href="https://c.im/tags/interfere" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>interfere</span></a> in the 2016 election.<br>
But Cannon said the practice of appointing such independent prosecutors has been inconsistent and based on a “spotty historical backdrop.” </p><p>Smith, she wrote, is “a private citizen exercising the full power of a United States Attorney, and with very little oversight or supervision.”</p><p>Conservative legal groups have long questioned the constitutionality of special counsel appointments. </p><p>Cannon repeatedly cited Justice <a href="https://c.im/tags/Clarence" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Clarence</span></a> <a href="https://c.im/tags/Thomas" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Thomas</span></a>, who raised the issue in a solo opinion this month as part of the Supreme Court’s decision granting Trump broad immunity from prosecution for official acts. </p><p>That Supreme Court case focused on Smith’s separate election interference prosecution of Trump in D.C.</p><p>She also embraced the arguments in a law review article by <a href="https://c.im/tags/Gary" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Gary</span></a> <a href="https://c.im/tags/Lawson" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Lawson</span></a> of Boston University School of Law and <a href="https://c.im/tags/Steven" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Steven</span></a> G. <a href="https://c.im/tags/Calabresi" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Calabresi</span></a>, a Northwestern law professor and 🔸a co-founder of the Federalist Society, with which Cannon is affiliated.<br>
Other legal experts, however, have joined former Justice Department officials and Smith’s legal team in saying<br> her ruling ignores the history of special counsel appointments and flouts Supreme Court precedent.<br>
Most notably, the high court in 1974 unanimously required President Richard M. <a href="https://c.im/tags/Nixon" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Nixon</span></a> to hand over recordings to a special prosecutor as part of the <a href="https://c.im/tags/Watergate" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Watergate</span></a> investigation. </p><p>In that opinion, the justices endorsed the office, citing several statutes under which the attorney general had <br>“delegated the authority to represent the United States in these particular matters to a Special Prosecutor with unique authority and tenure.”<br>
While lower-court judges are bound to follow the Supreme Court’s lead, <br>🔸Cannon took the unusual step of finding she was not required to abide by that aspect of the high court’s opinion in U.S. v. Nixon, <br>🔸saying the case did not directly address the validity of the office of special counsel.</p><p>Michael J. Gerhardt, a University of North Carolina law professor who teaches about constitutional conflicts between presidents and Congress, said <br>Cannon cannot just brush aside a unanimous high court ruling.<br>
“For a trial judge to ignore it is judicial malpractice,” he said, describing her most recent decision as <br>part of a “pattern of bias that leads her to endorse wacky or unfounded arguments, <br>and that’s a problem if you’re a judge.”<br><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/07/20/cannon-trump-florida-appeal-special-counsel/" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank"><span class="invisible">https://www.</span><span class="ellipsis">washingtonpost.com/politics/20</span><span class="invisible">24/07/20/cannon-trump-florida-appeal-special-counsel/</span></a></p>