Judge Aileen Cannon’s handling of hearings in Donald Trump’s criminal case involving classified documents has drawn scrutiny from legal analysts. Trump, the presumed 2024 GOP presidential nominee, faces charges related to unlawfully retaining classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago residence after leaving the White House. These documents allegedly contained sensitive national security information, leading prosecutors to assert violations of the Espionage Act. Trump maintains his innocence and has pleaded not guilty.
Appointed by Trump in 2020, Cannon has faced criticism for decisions favoring Trump in the case. Recently, she denied two motions from Trump’s legal team seeking dismissal of Espionage Act charges, leaving open the possibility of revisiting them later in the trial, strategically timed to prevent appeals by the Department of Justice’s special counsel, Jack Smith.
MSNBC host and legal analyst Katie Phang highlighted Cannon’s scheduling decisions for certain motions in the case, particularly those related to dismissing the trial on various grounds proposed by Trump’s team. Notably absent from the scheduled hearings were motions such as those based on Presidential Immunity, Selective and Vindictive Prosecution, Unlawful Appointment and Funding of Special Counsel Jack Smith, and suppression of evidence seized during the search warrant execution at Mar-a-Lago.
NOTE: Judge Cannon has YET TO SCHEDULE the following motions ⤵️
* Motion to Dismiss based on Presidential Immunity
* Motion to Dismiss based on Selective and Vindictive Prosecution
* Motion to Dismiss based on the Unlawful Appointment and Funding of Special Counsel Jack Smith
*…— Katie Phang (@KatiePhang) April 8, 2024
Legal analysts warn that this scheduling tactic could play into Trump’s favor, potentially leading to a scenario where crucial motions are held until after the trial begins. Former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance cautioned that granting such motions post-trial, after jury empanelment and invoking double jeopardy, could effectively terminate the case without the prosecution’s recourse for appeal.
Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor, characterized Cannon’s actions as a strategy to delay Trump’s trial. He observed that while hearings for motions filed by Trump’s co-defendants were scheduled, those filed by Trump himself were not, indicating a deliberate slowing of the legal process.
Aileen Cannon (Credits: Salon)
Some legal experts suggest pursuing Cannon’s recusal due to her conduct throughout the case. Vance recommended filing a motion to recuse, citing Cannon’s departure from standard judicial behavior. She emphasized that such actions have left legal professionals puzzled, advocating for the Department of Justice to take steps towards recusal, which could ultimately be appealed to the 11th Circuit if denied.
In response to these developments, Newsweek reached out to additional legal analysts for comment. The overarching concern among analysts is the perceived bias or unusual handling of the case by Judge Cannon, raising questions about the fairness and integrity of the legal proceedings. As the case unfolds, the focus remains on how Cannon’s decisions may impact the trajectory and outcome of Trump’s trial involving the classified documents.
