Attorneys representing former President Donald Trump have formally requested Judge Aileen Cannon, who was appointed by Trump himself, to take appropriate measures against Special Counsel Jack Smith. The claim is that Smith is intentionally obstructing Trump’s campaign efforts.
Cannon, a Trump appointee, was randomly selected to preside over the trial involving 37 counts against ex-President Donald Trump. These counts pertain to violations of the Espionage Act. Notably, Cannon also issued a controversial ruling that was later overturned by an appeals court, a decision criticized vehemently by a panel that included two other judges appointed by Trump.
While Cannon’s rulings have not consistently favored Trump, some of her actions have raised questions.
In a recent order, Judge Cannon denied a request from Special Counsel Jack Smith to seal specific evidence in a case involving classified documents. In addition to this, she instructed Smith to address the legal propriety of utilizing an out-of-district grand jury proceeding to continue investigations or seek post-indictment hearings in matters related to the ongoing case in this jurisdiction.
This week, Trump’s legal team turned to Judge Cannon once again for assistance in Smith’s case in the District of Columbia. The filing concludes with attorney Chris Kise respectfully urging her to take suitable action:
Within its brief pertaining to the D.C. Case, the Special Counsel’s Office argues that a December jury selection and a January 2, 2024 trial date before Judge Chutkan are appropriate, considering the schedules of President Trump and his legal representatives. This includes preparations for the subsequent May 2024 trial before Your Honor. President Trump opposes a January 2024 trial date for reasons laid out in his July 10, 2023 brief to Your Honor, responding to the government’s revised scheduling order (See ECF No. 66). The Special Counsel is fully aware of the complex practical issues tied to President Trump’s schedule, which includes a six-week trial commencing in October 2023 in New York, a case brought by the New York Attorney General against President Trump and his entities. Additionally, there is an ongoing contested primary for the Republican nomination for President of the United States. These commitments are in tandem with preparations for a March 25, 2024 criminal trial brought against President Trump by the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office. It is imperative that a Special Counsel committed to the equitable administration of justice never circumvent this Court’s orders under any circumstances, particularly with full awareness of the complex factors surrounding these multiple indictments against the principal Republican presidential candidate.
With respect, the actions of the Special Counsel necessitate appropriate intervention from Your Honor. Aside from blatantly disregarding the scheduled evidentiary hearing on December 11, 2023, the actions of the Special Counsel seem designed to intentionally hinder President Trump from adequately preparing for either trial and concurrently impede his presidential campaign. Separate action is being sought from Judge Chutkan as outlined in Exhibit 2. Therefore, we respectfully request Your Honor to compel the Special Counsel to provide an explanation for advocating a pretrial and trial schedule in the D.C. Case that directly conflicts with this Court’s present trial schedule.
Respectfully submitted,
Christopher M. Kise
It’s pertinent to note that the judge issued an unrelated order on Friday.