Special Counsel Jack Smith on Monday appealed federal Judge Eileen Cannon’s decision to dismiss the Mar-a-Lago classified documents lawsuit against former President Donald Trump, arguing that his appointment stood.
Last month, U.S. District Judge Cannon of the Southern District of Florida dismissed Smith’s lawsuit against President Trump, finding that it violated the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Cannon said Smith’s appointment as special counsel was unconstitutional.
But Smith appealed on Monday.
Judge dismisses Trump’s Florida classified documents lawsuit
Donald Trump and Jack Smith (Getty Images)
“The Attorney General duly appointed a special counsel who was properly funded,” the complaint states. “In finding otherwise, the district court deviated from binding Supreme Court precedent, misinterpreted the law authorizing the appointment of a special counsel, and failed to fully consider the longstanding history of Attorney General appointments of special counsel.”
Smith also argues that adequate funding was provided through a “permanent, indefinite appropriation” enacted by Congress to pay all costs necessary for the investigation and prosecution by an independent counsel appointed under U.S. Code.
The Appointments Clause states that “Ambassadors, other Ministers and Consuls, Justices of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States are appointed by the President, subject to the Advice and Consent of the Senate, but the appointment of inferior officers may be left to the President alone, or to the Courts, or to the Heads of Departments.”
However, Smith was not confirmed by the Senate.
Dismissal of classified documents lawsuit means ‘biggest’ legal ‘threat’ against Trump ‘disappears’: expert
“After careful consideration of the fundamental issues raised in this complaint, the Court is convinced that Special Counsel Smith’s prosecution of this case violates two structural foundations of our constitutional system: Congress’ role in appointing constitutional offices and Congress’ role in authorizing statutory expenditures,” Judge Cannon wrote in his decision last month.
“The framers of the Constitution gave Congress a vital role in the appointment of major and minor officials. That role cannot be usurped or dispersed elsewhere by the executive branch, whether in this case or another, in times of national need or not,” she continued.
“In the case of lower-level officials, Congress has the power to determine whether to grant appointment power to agency heads, and in fact Congress has demonstrated the ability to do so in the context of many other statutes. But Congress has clearly not done so, despite the special counsel’s aggressive interpretation of the statute,” Cannon added.
Click here to get the FOX News app
“After all, the administration’s increasing familiarity with appointing ‘regulatory’ special counsels in recent years appears to have followed a haphazard pattern with little judicial scrutiny,” she said.
Trump said: Smith’s investigation Smith accused Trump of possessing classified materials at his Mar-a-Lago estate. Trump has pleaded not guilty to all 37 felony counts raised in Smith’s investigation, including knowingly retaining national defense information, conspiracy to obstruct justice and making false statements. Trump has pleaded not guilty to all charges.
This is a developing story, please check back for updates.
