US Justice Department to appeal ruling dismissing Trump documents case
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox
Republican presidential candidate and former President Donald Trump attends Day 1 of the Republican National Convention on July 15, appearing with a bandaged ear.
PHOTO: REUTERS
Follow topic:
WASHINGTON - A US judge in Florida on July 15 dismissed the criminal case
US District Judge Aileen Cannon, who was appointed to the bench by Trump, ruled that Special Counsel Jack Smith, who is leading the prosecution, was unlawfully appointed to his role and did not have the authority to bring the case.
The Justice Department said it would appeal the decision.
The judge found that US Attorney-General Merrick Garland, who named Mr Smith in 2022 to oversee investigations involving Trump, did not have the authority “to appoint a federal officer with the kind of prosecutorial power wielded by Special Counsel Smith”.
It marked another blockbuster legal triumph for Trump.
The US Supreme Court ruled on July 1 that Trump has broad immunity from criminal prosecution for official actions he took as president.
The ruling came in a separate case against Trump, also pursued by Mr Smith, involving Trump’s efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss.
Judge Cannon’s ruling came two days after Trump was the target of an assassination attempt at a campaign rally in western Pennsylvania.
Trump has been formally named the Republican presidential nominee in Milwaukee, challenging Democratic President Joe Biden in the Nov 5 US election.
A spokesperson for Mr Smith said Judge Cannon’s ruling “deviates from the uniform conclusion of all previous courts” that have considered the issue. Courts have consistently found the attorney-general has the authority to appoint special counsels to handle certain investigations.
US President Joe Biden said he was “not surprised” by the case’s dismissal.
“It comes from the immunity decision the Supreme Court ruled on,” Mr Biden said. “The basis upon which the case was thrown out I find specious.”
Trump, in a social media post, said the ruling should be “just the first step” and called for the dismissal of all four criminal cases against him.
Trump was convicted in May on New York state charges involving hush money paid to a porn star to avert a sex scandal before the 2016 election.
Trump had pleaded not guilty in the documents case and in Smith’s other case, as well as to election-related charges in state court in Georgia.
In the documents case, Trump was indicted on charges that he wilfully retained sensitive national security documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida
Prosecutors have said the documents related to US military and intelligence matters, including details about the American nuclear programme.
Trump personal aide Walt Nauta and Mar-a-Lago property manager Carlos De Oliveira were also charged with obstructing the investigation.
Prosecutors will seek to revive the case in their appeal before the Atlanta-based US Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit.
Although half the judges on the 11th Circuit court were appointed by Trump, the court has not shied away from disagreeing with Judge Cannon’s opinions in the past.
In 2022, the court reversed Judge Cannon’s decision to appoint an independent “special master” to vet the documents seized by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) from Trump’s Florida estate, saying Judge Cannon lacked authority.
‘Breathtakingly misguided’
US Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, a Democrat, said in a statement: “This breathtakingly misguided ruling flies in the face of long-accepted practice and repetitive judicial precedence.
“It is wrong on the law and must be appealed immediately. This is further evidence that Judge Cannon cannot handle this case impartially and must be reassigned.”
At the very least, Judge Cannon’s ruling throws the future of the case into doubt. Trump’s lawyers have not made a similar challenge to the special counsel in Mr Smith’s election-related case.
Trump’s lawyers challenged the legal authority for Mr Garland’s 2022 decision to appoint Mr Smith to lead investigations into Trump.
They argued that the appointment violated the US Constitution because Mr Smith’s office was not created by Congress and the special counsel was not confirmed by the Senate.
Lawyers in Mr Smith’s office disputed Trump’s claims, arguing that there was a well-settled practice of using special counsels to manage politically sensitive investigations.
Judge Cannon’s ruling is the most consequential in a series of decisions she has made favouring Trump and expressing scepticism about the conduct of prosecutors. The judge previously delayed a trial indefinitely while considering a flurry of Trump legal challenges.
In an unusual move, she allowed three outside lawyers, including two who sided with Trump, to argue during a court hearing focused on Trump’s challenge to Mr Smith’s appointment.
Conservative Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas provided a boost to Trump’s challenge to the special counsel.
In an opinion agreeing with the court’s decision to grant Trump broad immunity, Justice Thomas questioned whether Mr Smith’s appointment was lawful, using similar arguments to those made by Trump’s lawyers.
Mr Garland appointed Mr Smith, a public corruption and international war crimes prosecutor, to give investigations into Trump a degree of independence from the Justice Department under Mr Biden’s administration. REUTERS
