Judge Cannon ruling denies bid to dismiss Trump documents case

A federal judge on Thursday denied former President Trump’s effort to dismiss the Mar-a-Lago documents lawsuit, saying more than 300 classified records recovered from his estate could be considered personal records. insisted.

The ruling, by U.S. District Judge Eileen Cannon, calls for the immediate rejection of President Trump’s claim that the Presidential Records Act (PRA) allows national security records to be considered personal property. The decision was made after asking the prosecutor.

“The Presidential Records Act provides no basis for pretrial dismissal,” Cannon wrote in his three-page decision.

While the ruling appears to be a victory for Smith, Cannon did not preclude Trump’s ability to raise the issue in court, complicating prosecutors’ appeal options. She also used ample space in her short decision to task the special counsel with comments in earlier filings urging the case to move quickly.

Thursday’s ruling came about six weeks after President Trump tried to dismiss the lawsuit. Legal experts expected his PRA claims to be quickly rejected by the courts.

In a court filing, Smith said the idea that President Trump could consider these records to be his personal property is a “fundamentally flawed legal premise.”

“It is a complete fiction that classified documents prepared by members of the intelligence community or the military and submitted to the President of the United States during his term of office were ‘purely private,'” his team said in a Tuesday filing. Ta.

“Based on the current record, the PRA should not play any role in the trial.”

President Trump is being charged under the Espionage Act, which prohibits the intentional retention of national defense information. He is also charged with obstruction of justice for attempting to conceal records after authorities requested their return. Prosecutors had argued that the PRA had nothing to do with President Trump’s ability to retain documents.

Still, Cannon appeared to lend credence to Trump’s claim that the records could be considered personal property under the PRA, and he issued competing jury instructions advising jurors on the issue. Both sides were asked to conduct a comparative study.

Those instructions spurred Smith’s response Tuesday, in which Cannon said it was “very important” that the case be “decided quickly” and revealed prosecutors’ frustration with the slow pace of the prosecution’s case. I made it.

Cannon lashed out Thursday, noting that the PRA’s claims could still be presented to a jury.

“To the extent that the special prosecutor requests preemptive finalization of jury instructions before trial, before charging conference, before trial arguments or presentation of evidence, the court rejects that request as an unprecedented and unreasonable request.” I do,” Cannon wrote.

She said her request for instructions to the jury should not have been “misconstrued” as endorsing Trump’s case.

“And this should not be construed as anything other than what it really is: a genuine attempt to better understand the opposing positions of the parties and the questions posed to the jury in the context of the upcoming trial.” ” Cannon wrote.

The possibility that the defense may still be brought at trial creates new headaches for prosecutors and complicates their ability to pursue an appeal.

If the issue were to come up in court and Trump was acquitted, the Constitution’s double jeopardy provision would prevent prosecutors from seeking an appeal.

However, prosecutors can seek appeals of various pretrial rulings, and Smith filed an appeal against Cannon’s jury instructions with the 11th Circuit earlier this week. The court previously shot down Cannon when she appointed a special chief to review documents at issue in her case.

In Thursday’s order, Cannon nods to Smith’s threat to appeal, saying, “As always, any party is free to utilize any appellate options it deems appropriate to exercise, as permitted by law. can be done,” he pointed out.

Updated at 5:15 p.m. ET