Judge: Jack Smith Appointment Unconstitutional, Dismisses Classified Documents Case Against Donald Trump
Cannon said his appointment violates the Appointments Clause of the Constitution.
Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the Florida classified documents case against former President Donald Trump after finding Special Counsel Jack Smith’s appointment unconstitutional.
Cannon said his appointment violates the Appointments Clause of the Constitution:
The bottom line is this: The Appointments Clause is a critical constitutional restriction stemming from the separation of powers, and it gives to Congress a considered role in determining the propriety of vesting appointment power for inferior officers. The Special Counsel’s position effectively usurps that important legislative authority, transferring it to a Head of Department, and in the process threatening the structural liberty inherent in the separation of powers. If the political branches wish to grant the Attorney General power to appoint Special Counsel Smith to investigate and prosecute this action with the full powers of a United States Attorney, there is a valid means by which to do so. He can be appointed and confirmed through the default method prescribed in the Appointments Clause, as Congress has directed for United States Attorneys throughout American history, see 28 U.S.C. § 541, or Congress can authorize his appointment through enactment of positive statutory law consistent with the Appointments Clause.
The government will likely appeal.
The government indicted Trump in 2023 after a huge FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago. He faced 41 felony counts.
The entire case started falling apart as soon as it started. We documented the fallouts under the Trump Florida Indictment tag.
In the Trump immunity case, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote:
I write separately to highlight another way in which this prosecution may violate our constitutional structure. In this case, the Attorney General purported to appoint a private citizen as Special Counsel to prosecute a former President on behalf of the United States. But, I am not sure that any office for the Special Counsel has been “established by Law,” as the Constitution requires. Art. II, §2, cl. 2. By requiring that Congress create federal offices “by Law,” the Constitution imposes an important check against the President—he cannot create offices at his pleasure. If there is no law establishing the office that the Special Counsel occupies, then he cannot proceed with this prosecution. A private citizen cannot criminally prosecute anyone, let alone a former President.
Clarence Thomas paved the road, and Judge Cannon just drove down it. https://t.co/7IpsfIKLZR
— William A. Jacobson (@wajacobson) July 15, 2024
Same here. https://t.co/u4x4F9unLu
— William A. Jacobson (@wajacobson) July 15, 2024
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
How could any other conclusion have been reached? Not only was the guy never confirmed by the Senate, he wasn’t even a employee of the DoJ. He worked for the ICC….in The Hague. The guy shouldn’t have been allowed to write speeding tickets or municipal building code violations.
Chaulk up another loss for Jack Smith!!!
When it looks like a loser, acts like a loser and probably smells like a loser, it’s a loser!!!!
The 11th Court of Appeals will reverse her
Trump’s AG will voluntarily withdraw the case before CA11 oral arguments.
And then it would go to the Supremes.
Thomas is over the 11th,,,, his opinion was a message to both courts.
the question being is the 11th
smart enough to realize that
the USSC is over them ….
From what I read, any appeal will go before the SC judge who oversees that district.
I also read that particular judge is named Clarence “The Greatest SC Judge Ever” Thomas.
Agreed. This outcome was the only (logical) conclusion. As Jacobson said, Thomas paved the way and Cannon drove down the road.
The only one dumber here than Merrick Garland is Jack Smith. Garland appointed a schmuck who loses every major case he’s assigned to, and Smith was dumb enough to accept.
I rain urine on the heads of the both of them.
Garland came very close to being a Supreme Justice.
At least he can be fired in january
We do have at least one reason to thank McConnell: he kept Garland off the SC.
Talk about old people who need to retire
He kept him off ONLY because he expected to negotiate an appropriate payoff from President Clinton.
If the only thing positive about McConnell you can say is something he did NINE YEARS AGO, then it’s LONG past time for the scumbag to retire.
Of course it’s long past time for McConnell to retire, and nothing in my comment indicated any other support for anything McConnell has done over his long RINO career of grifting. He’s almost as bad off mentally as FJB.
The sooner he and his RINO cronies leave office, the better.
As I’ve mentioned before, the Turtle, as awful as he can be, often seemed to take perverse delight in sticking it to Obama. I’ve often wondered what bee was in his bonnet that would cause him to deviate from his agenda just to bug Barack.
Even a blind turtle stumbles across a June bug once in a while.
And Marjorie Taylor Greene could file impeachment charges on him had oblunder succeeded in getting him past the senate.
Learn from aoc repubs, push the Constitution, push the Constitution and push the Constitution down the liberals throats until they flee the country.
These cases were never designed to go to trial, survive scrutiny and put Trump in a jump suit. They were designed to damage Trump and prevent his nomination or election. Had they been real legitimate controvesies they would have been brought sooner (none were filed before he started his re-election bid).
Since Jack Smith is illegitimate, can he now be sued? How about others involved in his illegitimate operation? Does this open him to any criminal charges? I am looking forward to seeing Jack Smith get everything he deserves in life.
IDK. It’s a great question. Someone else brought up the possibility of legal fees, which for Trump (and the other defendants) likely were in the millions of dollars.
I doubt it. He will argue that he was acting in good faith that Garland had the authority to appoint him. Judge Cannon also said that the funds Smith used to prosecute Trump were not legally withdrawn from Treasury. Doubt anyone can get those back either
If the funds were not legally withdrawn then doing so is embezzlement, with Smith as co-conspirator. Nobody will prosecute over this though.
I think that because it was an illegitimate appointment, it’s a voided prosecution, thus Smith can’t be prosecuted for falsifying evidence. Now Judge Cannon could make referrals to various legal bars . . .
And Trump (and whoever else) should have claims against the government for legal expenses.
There shouldn’t be surprise over this decision. The surprise should be that these illegal unconstitutional appointments have been going on since the Reno DOJ.
Does this mean that Jack Smith is an existential threat to our democracy?
I’d say the pedophile who hired him is
It means he, a private citizen, better have really good liability insurance to cover egregious violation of Trump’s rights. And that lawsuit will be in Florida, not D.C.!
Nah, he was acting under the authority of the DOJ. If anyone is going to be rung up it would be Garland.
But… does the belief that you are acting under the color of law allow you to do illegal things?
The difference between burglary and legally seizing things from someone’s house is a warrant. But what if the person requesting the warrant does’t actually have true legal authority to do so?
Sounds like a great reason for judges to not just rubber stamp warrants.
No, this ruling states that he was never legitimately appointed and therefore was not acting under the authority of the Department of justice.
You can’t act under the authority of a department that never had that authority.
I don’t think the Costanza defense will fly here.
No but that Independent Counsel stuff sure is. Unlimited authority, unlimited funds and answerable to no one in pursuit of whatever he or she wants to look into
Thanks so much for that “or she.” It really distinguishes you as a true conservative patriot, unaffected by current leftish trends.
But it’s the shes you have to watch out for the most.
Ask any J6 defendant.
I admit I’m a little disappointed. I hoped Cannon would un-redact and unseal every one of Mad Jack’s little hidden schemes and documents first.
Jack Smith really needs his own special prosecutor.
It could have fallen on many other issues which were also Constitutional violations, but this was the sweet spot that swats Biden and his DOJ for being sloppy attack dogs.
Wow. That means there is a circuit split, maling it likely that SCOTUS.will hear it.
If SCOTUS uphold it then the DDC case goes away too.
The question for me is if Jack Smith was not appointed legally, does he have immunity.
No, it’s not a circuit split unless the Eleventh Circuit upholds her ruling. I don’t think that likely.
Milhouse – I am not agreeing or disagreeing with you – the question is what other case is out there on this issue that would or would not create the circuit split.
Secondly – I have no opinion on whether the decision is correct and thus have no opinion on whether CA 11 will uphold or overturn. My no opinion on the correctness is because I have not done any research on the issue.
There is no way to sneak in Smith’s jurisdiction since federal law specifically calls for the appointment of the Attorney General, a Deputy Attorney General, an Associate Attorney General, EXACTLY ELEVEN Assistant AG’s, exactly one US Attorney for each judicial district, along with FBI Director, US Marshall Director, ATF, Prisons, etc.
The only path a Circuit Court has in overturning the District Court’s dismissal is if the government demonstrates the Attorney General is personally supervising Smith.
But the entire reason for Smith is to keep the Biden Gang’s hands clean. Hence the DoJ’s dilemma.
I don’t think this gift can be unwrapped so easily as a statement by the AG that he’s supervising smith. Smith has, per the ruling, been acting outside the law. Without legal authority. Every action he’s taken is a nullity. The grand jury he assembled also. The AG would have to make one of the line Fed District Attys reindict Trump. Not happening, at least not before the election.
Only if the AG hasn’t actually been closely supervising him. It might be embarrassing to “admit” now that he has been, but they might decide that is better than accepting that the appointment was illegal.
I don’t think there is one. My only point in that comment was that a district court’s decision, by definition, cannot create a circuit split. To get that you need to take it to the circuit court! Two of them, actually, in two separate cases.
thanks
– I did not think there was another case out there that would have created a split. fwiw, I am quite familiar with the court system, constitutional law, etc, so its easy for me to recognize how frequently you are correct in your analysis. It quite refreshing with your comments, though it is disheartening how how often you are condemned even though you are correct.
Milhouse: “I don’t think that likely.”
Why not?
Because the 11th circuit hasn’t shown that it has the greatest respect for Cannon.
Not for any reason to do with the merits.
When Trump has a SCOTUS judges opinion i hand, it will be hard. Do you think the court wants the possibility of it being appealed only to b told “WE TOLD YOU SO?”
Thomas didn’t actually say that Smith’s appointment is invalid, just that it might be. I can see the 11th circuit saying “We’ve considered it and we think it’s valid”.
I mean the 9th would certainly do something like that.
Maybe but the next court Trump’s lawyers are going to roll this through is the DC Circuit and I’ll put my retirement on them refusing to dismiss Smith on the same grounds.
we really need a story on the secret service leadership and their dei policies to make sure their agenda is more important than the actual requirements for the job
note the 2 females who came up to trumps armpits during his time of need from being shot
even if it was 2 males who were not strong enough to support the victims needs when the availability is in fact there but would then not have the dei protocol of women need to be out front for the world to see
also the nut job secret service female ( kamala harris assigned) who got into the fight with superiors
it wasnt her first rodeo in mental instability yet they hired here to meet the agenda
From 2019 to 2022, Cheatle served as senior director of global security at PepsiCo, where she was responsible for directing and implementing security protocols for the company’s facilities in North America. Her role involves developing risk management assessment and risk mitigation.[5][6][7]
In 2021, U.S. president Joe Biden awarded Cheatle a Presidential Rank Award for exceptional performance.[8] In August 2022, Biden announced the appointment of Cheatle to be director of the United States Secret Service,[9] and she assumed office on September 17, 2022.[10] Cheatle took over the Secret Service following “a turbulent couple months in which the agenc
Not sure how this is relevant to Cannon and Florida but you are correct. Those female Agents may be trained and outshoot everybody but that is not their job in this context. The protective detail’s job is to be bullet magnets. Jump on top of the protected person as a human shield and then link arms shielding that person until they are removed. The shooters are a whole different thing. Those women especially that blonde chick who came up to Trump’s collar bone did exactly what she should have but was simply not physically capable of protecting Trump as his face sticking out over her body shows.
Bongino on his podcast this morning covers this in detail and since that was his job for several years I defer to his expertise
So if the whole classified documents case was unconstitutional and now has been dismissed does Trump have the right to demand from US District Judge Aileen Cannon that the United States reimburse him for all legal expenses incurred while defending himself against these unconstitutional charges?
Or make a contribution to his campaign, in lieu of compensation for his legal expenses!
Probably not possible, but that would be a hilarious ask!
She can dismiss the case, but Smith will presumably appeal this immediately, and I doubt the Eleventh Circuit will agree with her. So it will have to go to SCOTUS. More delay until Trump is sworn in and then he can fire Smith.
If Smith was to win the appeal, does that mean the trial process goes forward, or does that stop all proceedings until this one issue is resolved?
Definitely puts the case on hold until the issue is resolved.
If it goes to the SC, there are definitely 3 justices that would rule in favor of smith/garland/doj.
I think what you are saying is irrelevant. If Trump is elected he will order the case dropped and any court action withdrawn.
Point out exactly the error in her reasoning to support your contention that the 11th circuit will not agree.
In reply to concise who replied to Milhouse.
fwiw – Milhouse is generally correct on his legal analysis – So dont jump to conclusions because of any partisanship.
Even though I am not an attorney, I deal with considerable legal issues in my line of work, so I have much better grasp of statutory and constitutional law than most all the commentators here. That being said there is considerable strong arguments on both sides of the issue in this case. Both sides have good arguments. Quite frankly, both CA11 and Scotus will likely rule based largely on political considerations.
If you wanted to insert yourself here and answer for Milhouse you might have at least tried to present some cogent examples of the winning arguments for the special counsel’s position. But you tellingly don’t, or can’t,
There is considerable discussions on the merits
See national review dot com for commentary
See volokh conspiracy
You spelled ‘wrong’ incorrectly.
There doesn’t need to be an actual error; the 11th can find one whether it’s there or not.
There are arguments on both sides of this question, and I have no opinion on who’s right. My doubt that the 11th will uphold Cannon’s ruling is not based on legal arguments but on politics.
Once Trump is inaugurated he can fire Smith and that will make it all moot.
I’m not confident that the 11th Circuit is going to look at this case and bless Mad Jack’s appeal with Thomas’s letter right in there, giving them a full and complete view of how they’re going to have egg on their face *again* when the appeal goes up to SCOTUS and gets squashed. The proverbial writing is on the wall: Jack was illegally appointed. There’s a right way to appoint a SC, and there was a Garland way. So glad he never made it to SCOTUS.
There’s a political purpose to allowing SCOTUS to decide in Trump’s favor – SCOTUS can then be excoriated by the Left for it’s “political decision” and be lambasted widely for its “corruption,” stoking the demand from the Dem base to “reform the court.”
Any SCOTUS decision that favors Trump is a judicial loss but a political boon to the Left.
It was a decision by SCROTUM that the special counsel was unconstitutional. How could they not come to the same conclusion?
Or are you going to argue that one justice in their concurrence to presidential immunity isn’t valid?
One justice, saying that there might be an issue, isn’t even dicta. It’s nothing at all. The 11th can’t be guided by that and has to make its own decision. And given how it has treated Cannon’s rulings previously I doubt it would uphold her ruling now. I am not expressing an opinion on who is right, just speculating on what the 11th is likely to do, right or wrong.
If it were the 9th there wouldn’t even be any question how it would rule.
I disagree. There are several examples where the courts have hung entire future decisions on pieces from concurrences ( Youngstown Sheet snd Tube). Heck I can think of a few opinions based on previous dissenting arguments. I find SCOTUS to be quite fickle.
Does Trump have a 1983 case against Smith and Garland?
Will the riots start today in Milwaukee, because we all know they are coming.?
Strangely, I was expecting riots and there seems to be nothing. Very odd almost like someone is in charge of a rent a mob and told them to stand down in light of Saturday
no riot … just a march
BLM antfa the usual leftist
but peaceful…
This was always a nonsensical and transparently contrived witch-hunt, to begin with, cooked up by a rabidly partisan and malicious Dhimmi-crat reprobate who worked at the National Archives. He thought himself oh-so clever, coordinating with the Biden White House, and, corrupt DOJ and FBI, to make an alleged mountain out of a less-than-molehill and cook up an alleged “crime” involving President Trump’s retention of records, that supposedly threatened national security.
Raiding President Trump’s home, the way that a dictator would have done to his political rival, in a third-world country, was a brazen and callous assault upon our Constitution and upon every single conservative and Trump-supporter in the U.S.
Great news.
I also read in the NY Post that President Trump is re-writing his convention speech, motivated by his surviving an assassination attempt; very shrewdly, in my estimation. The focus will be less on criticizing Slow/Corrupt Joe, and, more in the vein of an optimistic, unifying, Reagan-esque speech.
The man’s political instincts on this are sound and spot-on. Taking the high ground will yield fruit.
Precisely. Trump is now the unity candidate. His ability to at least read the room is peerless.
It looks even better in contrast to the usual tone-deafness of the opposition.
His immediately standing up and yelling “Fight” framed bu Secret Service and the Flag behind him sure was a masterpiece.
Donald Trump should set himself up in a bomb shelter. Until after the November election.
This court ruling, and the failed assasination attempt, and everything else that’s going on ….. it seems to me there’s too much to lose if Trump and his supporters continue to behave “bravely” etc.
There’s bravery.
And there’s stupidity.
If Trump is killed, the RNC may foist upon us any Rino or—heaven forbid—they’ll let kamala win.
As Pam from “The Office” would say, “They’re the same picture.”
No. The last thing he should do is start campaigning from his basement, and thus evoking memories Biden’s campaign four years ago. He needs to be the anti-Brandon in all ways and that means putting himself out there. The fact that it would be a brave thing to do is only a plus.
I suspect we’re going to be hearing quite a bit about the De Facto Officer Doctrine – Ryder v. United States (94-431), 515 U.S. 177 (1995) – moving forward, presuming the DoJ doesn’t simply withdraw the case in the foreseeable future (a forgone conclusion if Trump wins).
I should point out that in Ryder, the Court was reviewing a CONVICTION where military judges were holding their positions effectively illegally. The Rehnquist Court didn’t want to un-ring that bell. But, this is different. This is a finding of an illegal appointment before the trial begins much less before a jury has reached any conclusion. Not a lawyer, but I suspect the Court will look more dimly on illegal appointments in this context (pre-trial) than they did when looking at conviction. We’ll see.
Huge and needed win for Trump! He’ll make hay out of this at the convention for sure. He’s all but got the nomination clenched and that failed assassination attempt has given him an incredible amount of momentum and sympathy to help carry him through November. It’s looking more and more likely Trump will get his second term this time.
‘Dismisses case.’ That’s good news, but who will go to prison for this year long, multi-million $$$, unconstitutional political persecution?? Who? When?
Unless qualified immunity is abolished for the unconstitutional actions of bad actors so they can face criminal consequences, these bad actors will simply re-boot and do it again.
ABOLISH QUALIFIED IMMUNITY.
I doubt that qualified immunity applies to an illegal officer. But he is likely entitled to indemnity from his employer (unfortunately, we taxpayers).
“Clarence Thomas paved the road, and Judge Cannon just drove down it.”
Yup, that barn door was opened weeks ago and Trump’s lawyers at the time said there no plans as of yet to explore that avenue. Then there was and here we are.
If the courts keep making these correct decisions, I might not hate them so much.
I strongly suggest that those LI commenters who have X accounts click on the embedded X posts in LI articles and “like” (or better) “repost” them so that they will get more widespread attention.
Smith and everyone who worked for / with him should be required to disgorge every dime of their salaries and benefits paid to them during this investigation and prosecution.
That is the only way to prevent this from occurring again. If the people who do things illegally, under the cover of government, end up paying personally, then in the future, others tempted to do the same will think, “But what happens to me if they determine this is illegal?” Without that stick, this is going to happen again, and again, and again.
+100^100
How do you know Smith knew he was illegally appointed? He probably thought it was fine because Garland told him it was. More interesting is what now happens to Smith’s prosecution in DC. Even if the 11th Circuit upholds Judge Cannon I seriously doubt the DC Circuit will agree
Because ignorance of the law is no excuse. Amiright?
I really don’t know in this case.
Oh, it’s true in ALL cases. Ask any tyrant.
If Cannon’s order can be appealed, what about Baldwin’s?
Baldwin’s cant’ because jeopardy attached when it was dismissed with prejudice. Cannon dismissed Trump’s case without prejudice. Jeopardy generally can’t attach (even with most instances of prosecutorial misconduct) unless the jury has been empaneled and seated. In some states, it doesn’t attach until the state begins presenting its case-in-chief. Because the trial hasn’t begun in Trump’s case, jeopardy was likely never going to attach.
impaneled, not empaneled.
IANAL, but I believe any judge’s order can be appealed, including the order to dismiss with prejudice in the Baldwin case. I also think it SHOULD be appealed as the Brady violation alleged was not in any way material to the negligent homicide case, which is a requirement for dismissal with prejudice.
Honestly, I’m surprised as well because I know that civil cases that have been dismissed ‘with prejudice’ can still see that order appealed. But, reading through many of the Baldwin stories this week, that doesn’t seem to be an option, at least in Arizona. In fact, the prosecution said that they didn’t agree with the dismissal, but ‘respect the judge’s decision’ not, ‘we’ll immediately be working on an appeal.’
New Mexico.
This is the same “prosecution” that got on the stand and said Baldwin was their personal hero.
I can’t believe that there is such a thing as a decision that can’t be appealed. It seems obvious to me that this decision can be appealed. And in my opinion if it isn’t appealed then that will show that the prosecution was in cahoots with the defense. Unfortunately there’s nothing that anyone can do about that. The victim’s family can’t appeal it.
They still have that fat slob Bragg.
Not about the case, but in a way, it’s all related, just somehow the FBI can’t open up a phone … really? Since when
This phone is being smashed as I write
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/07/quantico-reportedly-cant-access-shooters-phone-yet-claims/
They should just hand it to a 15 year old. It will be unlocked in about 5 minutes.
Seriously, my nephew Gio could crack the nuclear codes in about 30 minutes with his spiffy new laptop. He doesn’t understand it when I call him “Hal”.
It’s important to smash it so the evidence on it can “disappear.”
If tranny girl hadn’t written her manifesto down on paper, the Swamp wouldn’t have had so much heartache for the past two years about hiding it.
Jim Hoft’s lie sheet again?! Cite a real source or it didn’t happen.
But yes, the FBI can’t just get into a phone. Remember the case of the San Bernadino terrorists, where the FBI couldn’t get into a phone, and Apple quite properly refused to help, until the FBI managed to find an unnamed consultant who could do it. Maybe they kept that guy’s number and should call him again on this one.
Good decision that will not be accepted by many who proclaim the importance of rule of law.
Has the American ship finally engaged its turn to normalcy? Surely, the Obamites will resist, but repudiation is now not unforseeable, and may it be powerful and for all time.
Good. The old statutes for an independent/special prosecutor went away back in ’99. Not a surprise that someone would make this basic argument about the validity of the appointment or that it would win the day. Seems pretty basic make a nomination, get Senate Confirmation, maybe get Congress to codify the process and circumstances for seeking an independent/special prosecutor v using the existing DoJ structure. Deferring to the Constitutional limitations doesn’t seem like a tough call to me but I have a simplistic view of the Constitution as establishing the explicit limitations of gov’t power. Others seem to view it as the starting point for ever expansive gov’t reach and power w/o any clear limits.
The guiding principle used to be, “When in doubt, cross all the T’s and dot all the I’s. It may be more than is necessary, but you’ll have saved yourself the trouble of defending it.”
Under the 21st-century Democrats and the Uniparty Swamp, it’s become “When in doubt, just do it — what are they going to do to stop you?”
Jonathan Turley, as erudite as he usually is, missed the mark on this case. He called it the most potentially dangerous of the cases against Trump, as if he missed all of the many signals that, one way or another, the case was going nowhere (and not even fast) and was, in spite of its appearance, on no sounder ground than any of the others. There were too many deficiencies, too many legal avenues for challenge, and a conviction would have ended up at SCOTUS, which fortunately has 6 justices with knowledge of the law, understanding of the Constitution, and reading comprehension skills.
If Smith is not a legitimate Special Counsel does he have immunity or can Trump sue him?
Now that is a good question. Say I’m appointed as a Guardian Ad Litem. All goes well then I find out the Judge had no authority to appoint me. Can I be held accountable for my decisions during that time since I had no idea the Judge erred? Smith was appointed Special Counsel by the AG of the US. The Chief Law Enforcement Officer of the country I’d think can do that and at the time no one objects. Should I now be held accountable when a Judge says “nope”? I had no idea and acted in good faith.
I’ll say no. Smith is removed and Garland is also off the hook as this was a matter interpretation of the statute. Don’t like it and wish all of those asshats were in jail but there it is.
Smith has recourse.
He just has to sue Garland for fraud and coverage for any damages he may have to pay in a lawsuit.
There isn’t enough popcorn in Yankee Stadium.
Been a tough few days for Democrats eh 😂😂
I may have to revise my opinions about sympathetic magic.
One little blood sacrifice, and all Trump’s bugbears are struck down one after the other
How DARE Judge Cannon act in opposition to the expressed will of the Regime? The political desires of those in power far outweigh mere law and the Constitution.
Yeah, there is a huge /SARC involved in that, but also more than a little truth as that is how the Left really feels. I would advise Judge Cannon to avoid places with overlooking buildings.
Subotai Bahadur
Thanks for all of the analysis, you legal eagles. Was waiting for this. Being a doc, I don’t want to listen to a bunch of talking heads on some leftist network blathering about their personal feelings about Trump–just want to know the ins and outs. I was surprised about the Appropriations Clause, because I know Thomas didn’t address that. That’s a wrinkle that Cannon must have really taken her time to research.
The question for everyone now is this: What is Tanya Chutkan going to do when Trump’s attorneys dump this petition to dismiss in her lap, given what Aileen Cannon just did? Chutkan dismissed a similar motion, I think, by Trump (or related party) earlier and it was upheld by DCCA. Now what happens?
Chutkan doesn’t have to give a **** what Cannon said. She’ll form her own opinion, and I think we all know what that will be. And the DC circuit will uphold her. So it will have to go back to the SC, unless it drags past Jan 20 and Trump can put an end to the whole thing by firing Smith.