Judge Aileen Cannon has written a strident criticism of prosecutor Jack Smith while granting his request to redact the names of witnesses in Donald Trump's classified documents case.
Cannon pointed out Smith's failures eight times while conceding that it was best to censor the names of government witnesses.
Cannon, a Trump appointee, is overseeing the case, in which the former president is accused of illegally retaining classified documents, hoarding them at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida and obstructing attempts by federal officials to retrieve them. The former president, and presumptive Republican candidate in the 2024 presidential election, has pleaded not guilty to the charges against him. He has denied any wrongdoing in the case and has said the documents he retained were personal.
Cannon's latest written ruling points to the deteriorating nature of her relationship with Smith, with the two sparring through legal papers in recent days.
Much of her criticism was of Smith's alleged failure to state adequate reasons why the names of government witnesses should be protected from public view.
In a ruling on April 9, Cannon wrote that Smith had failed to provide adequate argument against a press coalition that was fighting to prevent the censorship of documents in the case. She pointed out Smith's alleged failure three times in one paragraph.
"The Special Counsel had two opportunities to raise these arguments and failed to do so in both instances. The Special Counsel's initial Seal Request failed to offer a governing legal framework or any factual support for the relief sought," she wrote.
"Later, in response to the Press Coalition's Motion, the Special Counsel failed to engage with—let alone refute—the Press Coalition's argument that the First Amendment attached to the subject materials."
She also criticized his alleged lack of compliance with the rules on sealing sensitive court filings.
"And this is to say nothing of the Special Counsel's failure to comply with this District's Local Rules on sealing, which the Court has emphasized repeatedly throughout this proceeding," she wrote.
She explains that "the Special Counsel's initial Seal Request failed to provide the Court adequate support to grant the relief sought" and "the Special Counsel's sparse and undifferentiated Response fails to provide the Court with the necessary factual basis to justify sealing."
Newsweek sought email comment from Smith's office on Wednesday.
Cannon and Smith have been sparring extensively about Cannon's proposed jury instructions, which would allow the jury to conclude that Trump had the right to retain presidential records as personal items.
Smith has strongly objected to the proposed jury instructions and warned Cannon that he would appeal if she didn't change the wording.
In a ruling on April 4, Cannon called Smith's response "unprecedented and unjust."
Smith wrote in a filing on April 2 that if a jury was sworn in and Cannon then ruled that Trump should be acquitted because he had a legal right to retain the documents, then prosecutors would not be permitted to appeal—as the federal double jeopardy rule means a defendant cannot be tried for the same crime twice.
Uncommon Knowledge
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
About the writer
Sean O'Driscoll is a Newsweek Senior Crime and Courts Reporter based in Ireland. His focus is reporting on U.S. law. ... Read more
