Judge expands hearing to consider if special counsel was appointed unlawfully by Trump

The ongoing legal battle surrounding former President Trump’s possession of classified documents has taken a crucial turn as the judge overseeing the case has expanded the scope of an upcoming hearing to address the legality of the special counsel’s appointment. 

U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon, based in the Southern District of Florida, has decided to postpone the trial related to Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified records indefinitely. 

Postponing the trial, Judge Cannon has set deadlines for reports on June 10 and 17, with a nonevidentiary hearing scheduled for June 21 to discuss the “unlawful appointment and funding of the special counsel.” 

Amid concerns raised by former Attorney General Ed Meese regarding the legality of Smith’s appointment as a special counsel by Attorney General Merrick Garland, the June 21 hearing has been expanded to provide an opportunity for various parties to present arguments to the court. 

Meese, a veteran of the Reagan administration, has filed an amicus brief arguing that Smith’s appointment violates the Appointments Clause of the Constitution since Smith was a private citizen at the time of his designation. 

In his brief, Meese compares Smith to a “naked emperor,” emphasizing that an improperly appointed special counsel like Smith lacks the authority to represent the government in legal proceedings. 

Meese points out that Smith was tasked with investigating potential violations of the law related to attempts to influence the transfer of power following the 2020 presidential election. 

Responding to the criticisms, Attorney General Garland defended his decision to appoint Smith during a recent hearing, citing existing regulations governing the selection of special counsels. 

While Garland believes that his appointments comply with longstanding regulations and statutes, Meese and his supporters maintain that the appointment of a private citizen like Smith to a position of significant authority is unprecedented and unconstitutional. 

Against this backdrop, a hearing on June 21 in Florida will see arguments presented by legal representatives on behalf of Meese, constitutional experts, and former government officials. 

Furthermore, Judge Cannon has scheduled additional hearings from June 24 to 26 and set forthcoming deadlines for disclosures from the special counsel and the defendants. 

Former President Trump, facing a separate trial in Manhattan over charges stemming from Smith’s investigation, is set to appear in court on July 11 after pleading not guilty to multiple felony counts. 

Cannon has outlined a series of procedural steps leading up to Trump’s trial, culminating in a status conference on July 22 and subsequent hearings on the same day. 

Notably, the unsealing of documents related to the FBI’s investigation into Trump and the raid on his Mar-a-Lago estate has shed light on the process leading up to the legal proceedings involving the former president. 

House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan has raised concerns about potential tampering with evidence seized during the raid, prompting further scrutiny of the investigative process. 

Meanwhile, Smith has also brought charges against Trump in Washington, D.C., relating to election interference and the events of January 6. Trump has pleaded not guilty to these charges as well. 

With the Supreme Court deliberating on the issue of presidential immunity and the specifics of Trump’s legal challenges, the outcome of these cases remains uncertain. 

As the legal saga continues, the focus now shifts to the upcoming hearings and arguments that will determine the future course of the high-profile cases involving former President Trump and Special Counsel Jack Smith.