Jack Smith disagrees with judge’s decision on Trump’s case in Florida.
Special Counsel Jack Smith’s case against former President Donald Trump related to his handling of classified documents has taken an intriguing turn. U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon recently dismissed Smith’s case, arguing that Smith’s appointment as special counsel by Attorney General Merrick Garland was unconstitutional.
In her ruling, Cannon, who was appointed by Trump, stated, “Former President Trump’s Motion to Dismiss Indictment Based on the Unlawful Appointment and Funding of Special Counsel Jack Smith is GRANTED in accordance with this Order.” She further added, “The Superseding Indictment is DISMISSED because Special Counsel Smith’s appointment violates the Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution.”
Trump was facing charges related to Smith’s investigation into his possession of classified materials at his Mar-a-Lago resort. Trump denied all 37 felony counts, including willful retention of national defense information, conspiracy to obstruct justice, and false statements.
However, Smith is not backing down. He has filed a notice to appeal the dismissal of the case in the 11th Circuit. Despite the Justice Department declining to comment, a spokesperson for Smith mentioned that the dismissal deviates from the consistent opinion of previous courts regarding the Attorney General’s authority to appoint a Special Counsel.
The crux of the matter lies in the Appointments Clause of the Constitution, which stipulates that officers of the United States must be appointed by the President with the Senate’s advice and consent. Smith, never having been confirmed by the Senate, raises questions about the constitutionality of his appointment.
In her ruling, Judge Cannon emphasized the importance of Congress in appointing constitutional officers and authorizing expenditures by law. She highlighted that the Executive Branch cannot usurp Congress’s role in these matters, emphasizing the separation of powers.
Meanwhile, Steven Cheung, spokesperson for the Trump campaign, responded to Smith’s appeal notice by calling for an end to what he termed “Witch Hunts.” He urged the Justice Department to cease its politically motivated actions against Trump, especially in light of recent events.
Cheung’s reference to the attempted assassination of Trump at a campaign rally underscores the volatile political climate surrounding the former president. As the legal battle continues, it remains to be seen how this case will unfold and what impact it will have on the broader political landscape.
