DOJ Aims to Reignite Trump’s Classified Documents Case, Claims Judge’s Dismissal Was ‘Flawed’

WASHINGTON — U.S. Special Counsel Jack Smith has requested that a federal appeals court overturn the dismissal of a case accusing former President Donald Trump of mishandling classified documents at his Florida residence post-presidency.

The appeals process may extend for months, likely stalling any progress in the classified documents case ahead of the November election, where Trump is the Republican nominee.

In a late Monday filing, Smith contended that U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon’s decision to dismiss the case was based on a “flawed” assertion, claiming Smith’s appointment as special counsel was illegal.

Smith’s 81-page brief, submitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, referenced various statutes and a significant Supreme Court ruling from the Watergate era to support the legality of appointing special counsels by U.S. attorneys general.

He noted, “The district court deviated from binding Supreme Court precedent, misconstrued the statutes that authorized the Special Counsel’s appointment, and took inadequate account of the longstanding history of Attorney General appointments of special counsels.”

Smith further cautioned that the district court’s reasoning could threaten the Justice Department’s operations and undermine numerous appointments within the Executive Branch.

Cannon, a federal judge for the Southern District of Florida and a Trump appointee, dismissed the classified documents case on July 15. This ruling came shortly after Trump survived an assassination attempt in Pennsylvania and at the commencement of the Republican National Convention in Wisconsin.

Trump previously pushed for the case’s dismissal in February, framing Cannon’s ruling as a means to foster national unity following the attack on his life.

Cannon argued that Smith’s appointment violated two U.S. Constitution provisions related to how presidential administrations and Congress appoint “Officers of the United States,” as well as regulations governing the use of taxpayer funds for their compensation.

Smith’s appeal followed shortly after her dismissal of the case.

Significantly, this classified documents case represents the first instance of a former U.S. president facing federal criminal charges. A grand jury indicted Trump and aide Walt Nauta with 37 counts in June 2023, related to the mishandling of classified materials stored at Mar-a-Lago. An additional superseding indictment followed a month later, introducing new charges and a co-defendant.

This legal battle is among several Trump faces, as he was previously convicted in New York state court in May. Additionally, he is contending with federal charges for allegedly attempting to overturn the 2020 election results. That case has been pending for months as Trump has appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing for dismissal based on claims of presidential immunity.

The Supreme Court determined in early July that former presidents retain immunity for official “core Constitutional” acts, remanding the case back to federal trial court in Washington, D.C.

Smith has until the end of August to evaluate how this immunity ruling impacts the election subversion case against Trump, with a pre-trial hearing set for September 5.