Cannonball misfire: Trump appointee saves former boss

Yesterday, Judge Eileen Cannon indefinitely postponed former President Donald Trump’s classified documents trial while resolving difficult pretrial legal issues. You might wonder if she’s not tasked with solving those questions, and shouldn’t that have already happened? But that would betray a fundamental misunderstanding of Cannon’s job here, namely her role as a warm-up comic for talk show hosts who aren’t actually on set that day. Dew.

Mr. Cannon’s decision is part of a months-long conflict with special prosecutor Jack Smith, who has grown increasingly frustrated with Mr. Cannon’s blatant delay strategy. In April, Cannon asked for jury instructions regarding the Presidential Records Act, which is not the law under which Trump is being prosecuted. That would be the Espionage Act. Mr Cannon asked for instructions to the jury that reflected a “variety of scenarios”. That included the assumption by Trump’s defense that he essentially had a legal right to leave the White House with whatever classified information he wanted. “That legal premise is wrong,” Smith wrote last month, “and jury instructions reflecting that premise…would distort the trial.”

A brief summary of this incident would be appropriate. When Trump childishly left office in early 2021, weeks after attempting to overthrow America’s governing system, he sent a trove of classified documents to his home in Mar-a-Lago, Florida. I brought it in. Prosecutors allege he was deeply involved in producing these materials and spiriting them away to Florida. He bragged about it to anyone who would listen and basically dared the federal government to come and take the property, then government officials and others who bent over backwards to avoid the scene. , has refused to cooperate with the prosecution of the former president, who is already facing a litany of accusations. Potential charges for other crimes committed before, during and after his presidency. Trump was ultimately indicted on 37 counts, including violating the Espionage Act, making false statements, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy to obstruct justice.

This is not the first time the trial has been delayed. Cannon took two months to rule on the defense’s motion to dismiss the case in February 2024, arguing that Mar-a-Lago is entitled to whatever it wants under the Presidential Records Act. It took. She had already succeeded in delaying the trial by several months, for example by insisting that documents be reviewed slowly by a third party. The very real complexities of conducting a trial involving classified documents (including restrictions on who can see the documents and where they can be viewed) put them squarely on the schedule for President Trump’s D.C.-based election interference and insurrection trial. It will be a rush. That itself has been delayed by the Supreme Court’s outrageous decision to consider granting President Trump complete immunity from any crimes he committed as president.

The final situation here is not subtle. President Trump’s entire legal strategy for this has been from the beginning to somehow delay it until after the 2024 election. At that point, Mr. Trump will be the next president, and once he takes office, he hopes to pardon himself, his associates, and those involved in his vast criminal enterprise. Cannon has wisely never endorsed that logic directly, but he has tried to express it indirectly in all his decisions, big and small. This would give Mr. Trump and Mr. Cannon the best of both worlds, with the appearance of fairness but the practical effect of making them unable to prosecute until the 2024 election is decided.

The fact that Cannon is a Trump appointee is controversial, given that he had no experience in jury trials at the time of his 2020 nomination, but it doesn’t necessarily matter. Federal judges are appointed by presidents of both parties, and their origins should have no bearing on individual cases. But there could be a strong argument for reversal here, given Trump’s role in putting her in the position in the first place. But the truly troubling pattern emerging from Cannon’s courtroom is her unusual deference to any half-baked plans proposed by Trump’s defense team and her refusal to move the trial forward even at a snail’s pace.

Mr. Cannon’s delaying tactics are now just part of a tapestry of judicial and prosecutorial failures that continue to prevent the federal government from prosecuting a man who openly threatens the constitutional order. Why can’t we prosecute former government officials in the long four-year period leading up to a presidential election, especially those who are trying to reassert the presidency and the near-total immunity that comes with it, which the Supreme Court seems to be considering? For example, Americans believe that their systems of governance are far more vulnerable to authoritarian takeover than previously understood. This means that virtually every president and White House staff member commits a crime and is not punished, knowing that by the time the wheels of justice start rolling, their team will likely be back in power. This means that there is a possibility that it will not be done.

What will happen next is anyone’s guess. Smith could seek to have Cannon removed from the trial, which would be a natural enough outcome, but it probably wouldn’t move things along any faster. In the end, it will once again be up to American voters to uphold the country’s once-vaunted guardrails of democracy. Because no one in the federal government seems interested or capable of distancing the republic from this criminal fraudster who is openly telegraphing his claims. It is a plan to overthrow democracy again.

David Farris is an associate professor of political science at Roosevelt University and the author of the following books: It’s time to fight dirty: How Democrats can build a durable majority in American politics. His works are listed below 1 week, washington post, new republic, washington monthly more. You can find him on Twitter @davidmfaris.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own.