A federal judge in Florida on Monday dismissed the criminal classified documents case against former President Donald Trump and two co-defendants, ruling that the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith as prosecutor for the case violated the appointments clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Trump was accused in the case of illegally retaining hundreds of classified government documents at his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida after leaving the White House in January 2021, and trying to withhold them from government officials who sought their return.
The bombshell ruling by Judge Aileen Cannon in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida — who was appointed to that position by Trump — ruling comes two days after a would-be assassin narrowly missed killing Trump during a campaign rally in western Pennsylvania.
Cannon’s ruling, which also tossed criminal charges faced by Trump’s valet Walt Nauta and Mar-a-Lago worker Carlos De Oliveira, was issued hours before the start of the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee. That convention will formally confirm Trump as the GOP presidential nominee for November’s election.
Special Prosecutor Jack Smith (L), and Former President Donald Trump.
Getty Images | Reuters
Smith’s office can appeal Cannon’s ruling to the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals and is almost certain to do so.
A spokesman for Smith did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the ruling.
The question of the legality of Smith’s appointment is likely to end up before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Cannon in her ruling granting a dismissal motion by Trump’s attorneys found that Smith’s appointment as special counsel by Attorney General Merrick Garland violated the Constitution’s appointments clause, which says “Officers of the United States” must be appointed by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate.
She also ruled that Smith’s use of “permanent indefinite appropriation” — funding for his prosecution office — violated that constitutional clause.
“Both the Appointments and Appropriations challenges as framed in the Motion raise the following threshold question: is there a statute in the United States Code that authorizes the appointment of Special Counsel Smith to conduct this prosecution?” Cannon wrote. “After careful study of this seminal issue, the answer is no.”
“The bottom line is this: The Appointments Clause is a critical constitutional restriction stemming from the separation of powers, and it gives to Congress a considered role in determining the propriety of vesting appointment power for inferior officers,” the judge wrote. “The Special Counsel’s position effectively usurps that important legislative authority, transferring it to a Head of Department, and in the process threatening the structural liberty inherent in the separation of powers.”
The ruling is just the latest in a series of controversial rulings and decisions by Cannon that have been seen as favoring Trump.
Aileen M. Cannon, United States District Judge, Southern District of Florida
Courtesy: US Courts
Trump in a social media post responding to the ruling, wrote, “As we move forward in Uniting our Nation after the horrific events on Saturday, this dismissal of the Lawless Indictment in Florida should be just the first step, followed quickly by the dismissal of ALL the Witch Hunts — The January 6th Hoax in Washington, D.C., the Manhattan D.A.’s Zombie Case, the New York A.G. Scam, Fake Claims about a woman I never met (a decades old photo in a line with her then husband does not count), and the Georgia “Perfect” Phone Call charges.”
“The Democrat Justice Department coordinated ALL of these Political Attacks, which are an Election Interference conspiracy against Joe Biden’s Political Opponent, ME,” Trump wrote in the Truth Social post.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat, blasted the ruling and Cannon.
“This breathtakingly misguided ruling flies in the face of long-accepted practice and repetitive judicial precedence,” Schumer said in a statement.
“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,” Schumer said.
Trump still faces three other pending criminal prosecutions, all of which he had referenced in his Truth Social post.
In one of those, in federal court in Washington, D.C., the Republican is accused of crimes related to his efforts to undo his 2020 election loss to President Joe Biden.
Smith’s office is prosecuting that case against Trump in Washington.
Cannon’s ruling on the legality of Smith’s appointment is not binding on the judge in the D.C. case, Tanya Chutkan, but is certain to be cited by Trump’s lawyers there in a renewed effort to get that election case tossed out.
Chutkan also still needs to rule on issues in the case in light of a dramatic ruling on July 1 by the Supreme Court that found Trump had presumptive criminal immunity for official acts he performed as president. It is not clear yet how that ruling will affect the election case against him.
Trump is charged in a state case in Georgia with racketeering related to his attempts to reverse his 2020 electoral loss.
And he is awaiting criminal sentencing in New York state court after being convicted this year of crimes connected to a 2016 hush money payment by his then-lawyer to porn star Stormy Daniels.
This is breaking news. Please refresh for updates.
