Although Judge Aileen Cannon rejected Trump's request to have the case dismissed, she also refused to rule on the relevance of the Presidential Records Act in the case.
Any presumption at this point that Judge Cannon will (or can) be competently impartial in this matter is inexcusably naive. Once Smith brings the matter before the appellate court, the compelling need to remove her cannot be ignored or gainsaid. Her record betrays both incompetence and bias. The delay is unfortunate but better than injustice.
Smith's filing definitely seemed to lay the groundwork for mandamus by putting Cannon on notice that she has a duty to rule on this matter of law in a timely manner – at the very latest before jeopardy attaches. I agree he probably won't pull that trigger yet; he'll probably find ways to needle her a few more times to deliver a clear answer. But it seems like the solid start of building a record he can take to the 11th to say "make her do her job and rule".
She appears to be -- as one appellate advocate granted while being somewhat taken aback by some of the criticism of one of her moves -- "in the tank" for Trump.
It is not just that she is inexperienced or appointed by Trump (confirmed after Election Day 2020) or a conservative. You can find reasonable options there.
She has made a mockery of a historical trial of special importance to our democracy.
I seem to remember that Smith only charged about 30 documents that were in Trump's possession. If Cannon dismisses once a jury is seated can Smith charge again using different documents? Or does double jeopardy still apply?
The ONLY thing that matters in any of these cases is the clock, and Trump's team knows that. There's a significant probability this will end up being the downfall of the republic. Although it should never have gotten to the point where that outcome is even possible.
What I don't get is, if Judge Cannon intends to let Trump off the hook no matter what, why would she tacitly reveal her "plan" in advance, rather than waiting until the trial?
My takeaway from the order (and I need to point out IANAL) is Judge Cannon's calling this case "a complex case of first impression". There is a strong argument to be made that neither of these are true.
Espionage Act prosecutions are not rare and it seems well understood what evidence is needed to show willful retention. Though a former President has never been charged, other high level officials have been.
I think that the "complex case of first impression" shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the situation.
If I found myself in Judge Cannon's position, in well over my head in one of the most high-profile cases around, it would come as a relief to be taken off the case on the grounds of "an appearance of bias" rather than to be tossed for incompetence. She can eventually get past the one, but the other will haunt her until she reaches senior status in 30 years or so. Every lawyer to appear before her would treat her like a substitute teacher. Rodney Dangerfield would get more respect, and he doesn't get around much anymore.
Cannon must be removed. She is clearly not qualified to sit for a trial such as this and is showing her lack of knowledge of the law in a case with grave implications
Thank you for keeping this whole court case with Judge Cannon at the helm, easier for those of us with less knowledge in legal & court processes to understand.
Didn't she ORDER him to provide jury instructions? How is he demanding anything other than objecting to what she ordered, much less unprecedented and unjust.
Any presumption at this point that Judge Cannon will (or can) be competently impartial in this matter is inexcusably naive. Once Smith brings the matter before the appellate court, the compelling need to remove her cannot be ignored or gainsaid. Her record betrays both incompetence and bias. The delay is unfortunate but better than injustice.
Smith's filing definitely seemed to lay the groundwork for mandamus by putting Cannon on notice that she has a duty to rule on this matter of law in a timely manner – at the very latest before jeopardy attaches. I agree he probably won't pull that trigger yet; he'll probably find ways to needle her a few more times to deliver a clear answer. But it seems like the solid start of building a record he can take to the 11th to say "make her do her job and rule".
She appears to be -- as one appellate advocate granted while being somewhat taken aback by some of the criticism of one of her moves -- "in the tank" for Trump.
It is not just that she is inexperienced or appointed by Trump (confirmed after Election Day 2020) or a conservative. You can find reasonable options there.
She has made a mockery of a historical trial of special importance to our democracy.
She has no business being on this case.
I seem to remember that Smith only charged about 30 documents that were in Trump's possession. If Cannon dismisses once a jury is seated can Smith charge again using different documents? Or does double jeopardy still apply?
The ONLY thing that matters in any of these cases is the clock, and Trump's team knows that. There's a significant probability this will end up being the downfall of the republic. Although it should never have gotten to the point where that outcome is even possible.
Thank you Chris for the
relevancy of Smith's brief
in reply to Cannon and his
basically warning her, he
does have more moves
across this judicial board,
as well as his points of law.
I still see the 11th circuit in
Cannon's future.
On MSNBC tonight I heard Lawrence Tribe quote George Conway describing Judge Cannon as “incompetent, but effective”.
Well said!
Tribe says Jack Smith must go the 11th Circuit. It’s time.
What I don't get is, if Judge Cannon intends to let Trump off the hook no matter what, why would she tacitly reveal her "plan" in advance, rather than waiting until the trial?
My takeaway from the order (and I need to point out IANAL) is Judge Cannon's calling this case "a complex case of first impression". There is a strong argument to be made that neither of these are true.
Espionage Act prosecutions are not rare and it seems well understood what evidence is needed to show willful retention. Though a former President has never been charged, other high level officials have been.
I think that the "complex case of first impression" shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the situation.
If I found myself in Judge Cannon's position, in well over my head in one of the most high-profile cases around, it would come as a relief to be taken off the case on the grounds of "an appearance of bias" rather than to be tossed for incompetence. She can eventually get past the one, but the other will haunt her until she reaches senior status in 30 years or so. Every lawyer to appear before her would treat her like a substitute teacher. Rodney Dangerfield would get more respect, and he doesn't get around much anymore.
Chris,
Was Judge Cannon's denial of D's MTD without prejudice?
Thanks for this explanation of Cannon’s ruling, in which you confirm it says what I thought it said, unfortunately.
Cannon must be removed. She is clearly not qualified to sit for a trial such as this and is showing her lack of knowledge of the law in a case with grave implications
Thank you for keeping this whole court case with Judge Cannon at the helm, easier for those of us with less knowledge in legal & court processes to understand.
Keep going, Chris. TFG’s insane wall of piled up paper defense filings will crumble with enough scrutiny and fearless reporting.
Didn't she ORDER him to provide jury instructions? How is he demanding anything other than objecting to what she ordered, much less unprecedented and unjust.