Poli Alert Political & Civics
Related Articles
Jimmy Williams
Special counsel Jack Smith has criticized a recent ruling by Judge Aileen Cannon in the case of former President Donald Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents, calling her request for jury instructions based on a “fundamentally flawed legal premise.” Smith argued that the ruling could distort the trial and potentially lead to a directed verdict in Trump’s favor.
The dispute revolves around Cannon’s request for jury instructions framed with two competing scenarios concerning the Presidential Records Act (PRA) as it relates to the charges against Trump under the Espionage Act. One scenario allows the jury to determine the classification of documents under the PRA, while the other assumes presidents have sole authority to designate documents as personal or presidential.
Smith’s team argued that both scenarios rest on a flawed legal premise and urged Cannon to promptly decide whether the premise represents a correct formulation of the law. They indicated that federal prosecutors would appeal if the judge rules against them.
Trump’s defense maintains that the PRA gives him the authority to designate documents as personal or presidential, and that this determination cannot be questioned by the courts. They argue that all documents found in Trump’s possession could be considered personal, regardless of their classification.
Prosecutors countered Trump’s defense, stating that his reliance on the PRA is unfounded and characterized it as a post hoc justification. They emphasized that there is no evidence Trump designated the documents as personal during his presidency.
The dispute highlights the complexity of the case, in which Trump faces multiple charges related to the mishandling of classified documents. While Trump has pleaded not guilty to all counts, the legal battle continues, with Cannon denying his motion to dismiss the case based on presidential immunity and expressing skepticism over arguments related to the Presidential Records Act.
