In a scathing filing, the special counsel pushed back on Judge Aileen Cannon’s interpretations of laws that could define the case against Trump

Special Counsel Jack Smith went toe-to-toe with U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon over her requests for jury instructions in Donald Trump’s classified documents case.

In a scathing filing submitted Tuesday, Smith accused Cannon of operating on an “unstated and fundamentally flawed legal premise” when she requested that the parties in the case draft different versions of their proposed jury instructions based on their competing interpretations of laws governing classified materials and presidential records.

Trump has argued that his retention of classified documents after his ouster from the White House was perfectly legal. Claiming that he both unilaterally telepathically declassified the documents, and that they were simply personal records he was already authorized to take. The former president’s trial on 40 charges related to his alleged mishandling of the documents is scheduled to begin in May, but will likely be delayed.

  • @stoly
    link
    28 months ago

    I guarantee that it’ll come back to bite her. The judiciary does not take kindly to rogue judges.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      12
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Ahh yes. Just like all those penalties for Matthew Kacsmaryk that will arrive aaaaany day now.

      Federal judges serve for life. There’s not a whole lot anybody can do about this.

    • @techt
      link
      108 months ago

      What are you basing this on?

      • @stoly
        link
        18 months ago

        Courts self manage their own judges. Usually an appeals court or a state supreme court will punish judges for misconduct. At the Federal level, I’m not sure if it starts at an appeals court or the SCOTUS, but they can definitely punish and remove federal judges as well. Impeachment is also an option, but that’s a hard one to do.

        • @techt
          link
          88 months ago

          I hear you, and those things seem nice at a glance, but I don’t agree with your sense of guarantee. We’re seeing an upending of things that “usually” happen, or that “definitely can” happen, especially with “self-managed” entities such as the SCOTUS. Have you seen judges actually get held accountable recently, even locally?