A judge's ruling on Monday that the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith was “unconstitutional” will almost certainly go to the Supreme Court, potentially causing Trump's January 6th and classified documents lawsuits to fail.
Judge Eileen Cannon ruled that Attorney General Merrick Garland lacked the authority to appoint Smith, a private citizen who was neither appointed by the president nor confirmed by the Senate, to prosecute the case against Trump. Cannon's decision to dismiss the classified documents case, coming just weeks after the Supreme Court ruled that former presidents have immunity from prosecution for official duties while in office, is good news for Trump as it will likely have an impact not only on the Florida prosecution but also on Smith's other prosecution of Trump in Washington, DC.
“The Mar-a-Lago Papers case has long been considered the most powerful case against Trump,” former federal prosecutor Joseph Moreno told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “This ruling allows the case to be extended indefinitely and potentially even dismissed.” (RELATED: Judge dismisses Trump's classified documents lawsuit citing Jack Smith's illegal appointment)
Smith plans to appeal the sentence and his office Said MondaySmith could appeal Cannon's ruling to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, but that would take time and likely lead to a split circuit court, almost certain to result in a Supreme Court review.
“Judge Cannon will undoubtedly be attacked by those on the left as a Trump-pimped politician, but that is a grossly unfair assessment,” John Malcolm, vice president of the Heritage Foundation's Institute for Constitutional and Government Studies and a former Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department's Criminal Division, told DCNF.
Malcolm, on page 93 of Canon Verdict “This particular case should be judged on its merits, not on whether you like or dislike the outcome.”
“Indeed, the appointment of a special counsel with nearly unlimited powers, without any consultation with Congress, was one of the grievances raised against King George III in the Declaration of Independence, and it is the reason the Appointments Clause of the Constitution was written to give Congress a role in appointing special counsels,” he told DCNF. “Mr. Cannon's opinion pinpoints exactly why Attorney General Merrick Garland's appointment of Mr. Smith violates the Constitution: Congress has never passed a law giving Mr. Garland such powers.”
🚨BREAKING: Judge Eileen Cannon dismisses Trump classified documents lawsuit, finding Biden DOJ's appointment of Jack Smith unconstitutional. pic.twitter.com/wACXrR5MLZ
— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) July 15, 2024
Cannon's decision is likely to have an impact on Trump's lawsuit, filed by Smith in Washington, D.C., in which Trump is charged with four counts of attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 election. (Related: Jack Smith and Fani Willis have “little left” to say to Trump after immunity ruling)
“Technically, [District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan] “We are not bound by Cannon's decision, and given his past hostility toward Trump, we probably won't follow it,” Moreno told the DCNF, “but it allows Trump to raise the same issues, knowing that once again the Supreme Court will ultimately side with him.”
DC circuits were previously Rejected Cannon accepted this argument when he ruled on the challenge to the appointment of special counsel Bob Mueller in February 2019, which means Cannon's ruling is unlikely to have an immediate impact on Trump's other cases, Malcolm told DCNF.
“That's the law in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, where the Jan. 6 case is pending,” he said.
“The issue of Mr Smith's appointment [Florida] “Given the diverging positions of the justices so far in the DC case, it's likely their positions will remain at odds until the case is appealed,” former federal prosecutor Andrew Cherkasy told DCNF. “Disagreements may remain at the circuit court level, leaving it to the Supreme Court for clear direction.”
Justice Clarence Thomas addressed this issue in his concurring opinion on the Supreme Court's presidential immunity ruling, saying Smith's prosecution “may violate the very fabric of our constitutional structure.”
Judge Cherkassky said it was “unclear whether the other justices would agree” with Justice Thomas' opinion because “this issue has not been considered specifically by the Supreme Court.”
“It would take months of debate within the Supreme Court to reach a majority opinion on this issue, and there is no good precedent to predict how the issue will be decided,” he told DCNF.
Moreno argued that dropping the lawsuit entirely would likely be the “wisest political decision” given Biden's “history of mishandling classified documents.”
“In short, in light of last week's assassination of President Trump, President Biden can give the appearance of conciliatory power and drop these cases that have serious legal questions and political implications,” Moreno told DCNF. “If he is serious about quelling the hostility and anger in our country today, let's hope he actually backs up his words with actions.”
All content produced by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent, nonpartisan news service, is available free of charge to any legitimate news publisher with a large readership. All republished articles must include our logo, reporter byline, and affiliation with the DCNF. If you have any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact us at licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
