Judge appears inclined to delay Trump classified documents trial into 2024
Judge appears inclined to delay Trump classified documents trial into 2024
Judge Aileen Cannon said she would issue a ruling later after appearing skeptical of arguments from both sides
Judge Aileen Cannon said she would issue a ruling later after appearing skeptical of arguments from both sides
The federal judge presiding over Donald Trump’s classified documents case signaled that she could delay the trial until 2024, appearing inclined to find that the matter was sufficiently complex after hearing arguments from prosecutors and the former president’s lawyers on Tuesday.
Donald Trump in Bedminster, New Jersey, on 13 June.
Trump says he received target letter in federal January 6 investigation
Read more
The US district court judge Aileen Cannon did not rule from the bench on a timetable during the roughly two-hour pre-trial conference at the courthouse in Fort Pierce, Florida, and concluded the hearing by saying she would enter a written order at a later date.
Prosecutors in the office of special counsel Jack Smith, who is overseeing the documents case and the investigation into Trump’s efforts to obstruct the transfer of power, had asked Cannon last week to reject Trump’s suggestion to postpone the trial until after the 2024 election.
The dueling requests from Trump and the justice department present an early test for Cannon, a Trump appointee who is under heightened scrutiny for issuing favorable rulings to the former president during the criminal investigation, before they were overturned on appeal.
[article continues]
On the Lawfare podcast, Ben Whittes, who has been very critical of Trump for years, seemed perplexed by DOJs position that the case isn't complex given the number of classified documents and there being separate charges for each document. They noted that when asked the Justice Department couldn't identify a similar case that went to trial in under a year, but here DOJ is asking for trial in less than six months.
Cannon is a hack who has already been rebuked by a conservative appeals court. Her reputation is in the shitter. It will be interesting to see what she does here, try to revive her reputation in the legal community somewhat, or continue to be a partisan hack. I don't think it would be surprising or even unreasonable if she sets trial sometime in the spring of 2024. If she wants to be a complete hack she'll set it for after the 2024 election in November, giving Trump the opportunity to quash it by pardon or his control over the Justice Department if he wins.
Even if she sets a reasonable trial date, I'm sure she will have plenty of other opportunities to decide motions on a partisan political basis. Will she be an outright hack like she was when she appointed a special master? Or will she softly tip the scales in Trumps direction while preserving some plausible deniability as reputational cover? Those are the only two realistic scenarios going forward.