Quick Hit:

Special Counsel Jack Smith and the Department of Justice plan to appeal Judge Eileen Cannon's dismissal of the classified documents case against Donald Trump, potentially setting the stage for a Supreme Court showdown.

Key Details:

• Judge Eileen Cannon dismissed the Trump classified documents case, citing constitutional issues with Jack Smith's appointment as special counsel.
• Smith's appeal could reinstate the indictment and might lead to reassignment of the case to a different judge.
• The case will face lengthy legal battles, unlikely to reach trial before the November election.
•  

Diving Deeper:

According to Associated Press, Special Counsel Jack Smith and the Department of Justice are gearing up to appeal U.S. District Judge Eileen Cannon’s recent decision to dismiss the classified documents case against former President Donald Trump. This unexpected ruling paused what many legal experts considered the most straightforward prosecution against Trump.

Smith’s planned appeal, expected to escalate to the U.S. Supreme Court, aims to reinstate the indictment and potentially reassign the case to another judge. Judge Cannon’s 93-page order contended that Smith’s appointment by Attorney General Merrick Garland, rather than by the president and Senate confirmation, violated the Constitution. This argument had been vigorously opposed by prosecutors.

Smith’s team plans to argue that Cannon's decision is a significant outlier, as noted by Michael Gerhardt, a law professor at the University of North Carolina. A spokesperson for Smith’s office underscored that Cannon’s opinion contradicts all previous court conclusions affirming the Attorney General’s authority to appoint a Special Counsel.

On the other hand, Jesse Panuccio, a former associate attorney general in the Trump administration, defended Cannon’s analysis as "careful and scholarly." Panuccio acknowledged longstanding legal issues surrounding special counsels, adding that this case brings to light serious constitutional concerns.

Trump welcomed the dismissal, calling for the other cases against him to be thrown out as well, labeling them as “Witch Hunts.” Cannon, a Trump appointee, has previously frustrated the Justice Department with her handling of the case, including an overturned decision to appoint an independent arbiter for seized documents.

Whether Smith’s team will request Cannon’s reassignment remains uncertain. Although such requests are rare, precedent exists for appeals courts to reassign cases to preserve the appearance of justice, as seen in a 1989 Florida case.

Cheryl Bader, a Fordham University law professor, and former federal prosecutor, suggested that reassignment might be warranted due to Cannon’s perceived delays and obstacles. Gerhardt echoed this sentiment, criticizing Cannon’s frequent poor decisions. However, Panuccio cautioned against seeking reassignment based solely on disagreement with Cannon’s ruling, given its support from a Supreme Court justice.

The impending appeal ensures prolonged legal battles, with no trial likely before the November election. If Trump is elected president, he could potentially order the dismissal of the case, further complicating the legal landscape.