Prosecutors may wait until Florida Judge Aileen Cannon makes an "objectionable" ruling before taking steps to have her recused from Donald Trump's classified documents case, one legal expert has suggested.
Writing in her blog, former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance discussed the random assigning of Cannon, who was elected to the bench by Trump after he lost the 2020 election, to the case in which the former president has been charged with illegally obtaining sensitive materials after he left office, and then obstructed a federal attempt to retrieve them from his Mar-a-Lago resort.
The decision was met with some outcry and calls for Cannon to recuse herself from the case over concerns about her impartiality, given her previous decisions and rulings under the classified documents investigation.
If Cannon does not voluntarily recuse herself from Trump's case, prosecutors could file a motion with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit requesting that she be removed on grounds that her "impartiality might reasonably be questioned," as per the legal standard.
Profile photo of Aileen M. Cannon, United States District Judge. Former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance suggested prosecutors might wait until Florida Cannon makes an “objectionable” ruling before trying have her recused from Donald Trump’s classified documents case. Southern District of Florida
However, Vance suggested that the DoJ may wait until Cannon makes another controversial decision before filing an official request to have her recused in order to make their argument stronger.
"Most likely, though, prosecutors will wait for Cannon to make an objectionable ruling that can be appealed pre-trial, and use that opportunity to request that the 11th Circuit order the Chief Justice in the Southern District of Florida to reassign the case on remand," Vance wrote.
Cannon caused controversy last year after she went against the DoJ's view and appointed a special master to review the thousands of seized materials removed from Mar-a-Lago, delaying the federal investigation. She also told prosecutors they could not use more than 100 top secret materials seized from Mar-a-Lago as part of their evidence.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit later ruled in favor of the DoJ on appeal, stating that Cannon had "improperly exercised equitable jurisdiction" to make such a decision.
Cannon also previously rejected a request from the Special Counsel appointed in the case, one of Trump's choices Raymond Dearie, after he suggested that the former president's legal team should formally state if the list of items the FBI say they removed from Mar-a-Lago in August is inaccurate.
The ruling meant the former president could not testify under oath that he believes federal agents may have "planted" evidence against him, which he originally suggested following the August 2022 raid, or state which documents Trump had apparently declassified.
As the judge assigned to the classified documents case, Cannon could have the authority to rule prosecution's evidence is inadmissible, disqualify any of the DoJ's potential witnesses, or reject certain jury members. Cannon could also decide to push back the trial date until after the 2024 election, where Trump is currently favorite to be the GOP candidate.
Vance said that the concern about her impartiality "forms a solid basis" for Cannon to decide that she should recuse herself voluntarily.
"And she could couch it in this manner, that although she is confident she could handle the case fairly, she is stepping aside to ensure the public has confidence in this highly important matter," Vance said.
"That wouldn't guarantee a judge appointed by a Democratic president would take over—it could even be another Trump appointee. But it would ameliorate specific concerns about a specific judge that would so overtake the case that it would be impossible to have confidence in the outcome."
Vance said that Cannon getting randomly selected to oversee the classified documents case "unnecessarily complicates" the trial involving the former president.
"Trump seems to get all the breaks, and this is a difficult one to stomach. But I continue to think the courts will sort this out, one way or the other," Vance said.
The DoJ has been contacted for comment.
chubs66 on June 12nd, 2023 at 17:09 UTC »
No one should ever be tried by a person they've appointed to a judgeship. full stop. The fact that she already has a tainted record when dealing with Trump just makes this whole situation all the more ridiculous. She should never have been an option for this trial.
chibi75 on June 12nd, 2023 at 16:41 UTC »
If this woman destroys her career for this lowlife grifter, then she is not only very stupid, but she also deserves having her career destroyed.
sihtydaernacuoytihsy on June 12nd, 2023 at 16:28 UTC »
I love that Newsweek summarized a substack post, without linking to it, and called that an article. Jesus, just pay the lady who wrote the blog to write up a summary.