Cannon Strikes Again

To go along with James Joyner’s post, the NYT reports Judge Cannon Blocks Release of Special Counsel’s Final Report on Trump Documents Investigation.

The federal judge who handled President-elect Donald J. Trump’s classified documents case temporarily barred the special counsel, Jack Smith, on Tuesday from releasing his final report on the investigation to the public.

In a brief ruling, Judge Aileen M. Cannon, a Trump appointee who dismissed the documents case in its entirety this summer, enjoined Mr. Smith from sharing his report outside the Justice Department until a federal appeals court in Atlanta, which is now considering a challenge to her dismissal of the case, makes a decision about how to handle the report.

My guess is that the pending appeal provides a legal fig leaf for this order. But it sure is amazing how Eileen Cannon always manages to do what Trump wants done.

FILED UNDER: Open Forum, ,
Steven L. Taylor
About Steven L. Taylor
Steven L. Taylor is a retired Professor of Political Science and former College of Arts and Sciences Dean. His main areas of expertise include parties, elections, and the institutional design of democracies. His most recent book is the co-authored A Different Democracy: American Government in a 31-Country Perspective. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Texas and his BA from the University of California, Irvine. He has been blogging since 2003 (originally at the now defunct Poliblog). Follow Steven on Twitter

Comments

  1. Sleeping Dog says:

    She’s pressing for a SC or at least Appellate seat, he’ll pass over her.

    ReplyReply
    1
  2. Kurtz says:

    For some people, professional ambition is the only moral principle.

    ReplyReply
    3
  3. gVOR10 says:

    IANAL, and as far as I know, neither is Atrios, but I think his comment is valid,

    Cannon can’t order Garland around on this any more than a Philly Traffic Court judge can sentence her to life in prison. It is not adhering to norms to submit to corruption.

    In other news, Trump has decided to rename the Gulf of Mexico as Gulf of America.

    ReplyReply
    3
  4. just nutha says:

    @Sleeping Dog:

    …he’ll pass over her.

    Well duh! The Devil never negotiates about souls he already owns. The big, important deals are always for newbies.

    ReplyReply
    1
  5. @gVOR10: IIRC, Atrios has a Ph.D. in Economics.

    ReplyReply
    1
  6. Tony W says:

    To paraphrase Trump’s second-favorite president Andrew Jackson – “Judge Cannon has made her ruling, let her enforce it”.

    ReplyReply
    1
  7. Jay L Gischer says:

    It appears that Cannon was not very careful to be specific about which volume. One of which pertains to the prosecution before Judge Chutkan, over which she holds no jurisdiction whatsoever. She has some figleaf over the other volume, though.

    There are two major goals I see here being aimed at:

    1. Delay. Y’all get this.
    2. Framing the report as a “fake news” political attack. Just like the stuff on Hunter Biden. I think they understand that most people realize the Hunter Biden stuff was hyped beyond reason. And they want this to look like the same kind of exaggerated nonsense.

    This is meant to make it a problem – a political problem – should Biden step in and make sure the report is released. Which makes it look more like a political vendetta than a sober recitation of facts.

    Damn, I wish I knew a way to counter this bullshit better.

    ReplyReply
    1
  8. Gustopher says:

    Now that there is a court order, it would be very wrong, and maybe even illegal to leak it. And we must respect norms, laws and the independent judiciary.

    What I’m saying is that it should be leaked, and Biden should pardon the leaker.

    The Presidential pardon is an important part of the legal process. And the norm has been to pardon your co-conspirators, going back to at least Bush I, if not earlier. (I don’t remember who Reagan pardoned, and Ford wasn’t involved in Watergate, I think)

    ReplyReply
    3
  9. CSK says:

    @Gustopher:

    Mark Felt, for one.

    ReplyReply
    1
  10. Joe says:

    Appellate law is not my thing, but I recall there is a thing called “the mandate” that is very intentionally passed from one court to the next to indicate whose got the ball. I can’t imagine how or why Cannon would have any residual mandate in this case and I would agree with https://www.eschatonblog.com/2025/01/the-question-remains.html

    ReplyReply
    1
  11. a country lawyer says:

    I’m with eschaton on this. I think Cannon no longer has jurisdiction on this matter. She issued an order dismissing the case and it was appealed to the 11th Circuit. Once the appeal is perfected she loses jurisdiction to the circuit court.

    ReplyReply
    1
  12. Beth says:

    @a country lawyer:

    That was my thought too. Also I don’t know how she would have jurisdiction to force or stop Garland from doing anything. I mean unless federal criminal cases give federal judges absolute jurisdiction over the AG at all times which seems absurd.

    ReplyReply
    1
  13. Rick DeMent says:

    @gVOR10:

    North or South America?

    ReplyReply
  14. gVOR10 says:

    @Rick DeMent: He didn’t say.

    ReplyReply
  15. Paul L. says:

    I love the “You can’t criticize a Judge” crowd getting upset when they disagree with a Judge’s rulings .
    I want to write a fictional fantasy story based on the Knight Templar with the power abusive judges named after the Trump judges. Bet I would get a gag order and sued for defamation from the law enforcement caste.

    ReplyReply

Speak Your Mind

*