CNN
—
Judge Eileen Cannon indicated Friday that she does not intend to allow the Justice Department to share Special Counsel Jack Smith’s report on the classified documents case with Congress, at least not yet.
“At the end of the day, what is the urgency to do this now?” Cannon asked Justice Department attorney Elizabeth Shapiro at a hearing in Fort Lawrence. Courtroom in Pierce, Florida.
Attorney General Merrick Garland released portions of the Smith report earlier this week, which focused on January 6 and Trump’s attempts to overturn the election. The Justice Department is trying to show the classified document report to some members of Congress, but has not yet made it public.
Cannon, who was appointed by President Trump in 2020, is in charge of Trump’s criminal case in Florida, where he was indicted by a special counsel for allegedly mishandling classified documents brought to his Mar-a-Lago mansion. I’ve been overseeing the issue. Cannon, who was randomly assigned the case after ruling in favor of Trump in a civil suit that blocked a document review (later overturned by a higher court), faced criticism for delays in the case. He later dismissed the controversial charges against Trump, saying: Mr. Smith’s appointment violated the Constitution.
Mr. Smith has resigned from the department, and Mr. Garland will lose all control over what happens to the report and the massive classified documents case when Mr. Trump takes office at noon Monday. Friday’s hearing ended without Cannon issuing a ruling.
The controversy surrounding Cannon centers on Congress’ rights to special counsel investigations, especially after President Trump made it clear during the 2024 campaign that he would not respect the special counsel’s typical independence from the administration. There is transparency.
On Friday, Mr. Cannon grilled Mr. Shapiro on why the department was submitting the report to Congress now that prosecutions against Mr. Trump’s former co-defendants could be reopened. Cannon dismissed the lawsuit against them last summer, but that decision is being appealed.
Trump was removed as a defendant in his post-reelection appeal, but Cannon asked the Justice Department on Friday whether Trump could be indicted again in the future because the charges were dismissed “without prejudice.” The re-indictment was not fully seized.
Shapiro said there is no answer to that question.
If the court allows, the Justice Department will show the report to Republican and Democratic leaders of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, but they will only be able to view it privately, provided it is not disseminated. This is the information from there.
Still, the justices asked for examples of the department disclosing nonpublic information from investigative work to Congress even though the issue was not fully resolved.
Cannon noted that in past instances when the department has released special counsel reports, those reports have been disclosed after a “moment of finality” that was “beyond any doubt.”
Cannon is one of several people outside the Justice Department, including Trump’s lawyers, who have seen the report. Earlier this week, the department provided Cannon with the unedited and redacted versions it had planned for limited review by lawmakers.
President Trump’s Justice Department (likely led by some of the defense lawyers who had sought court orders to block the release of volumes two of Smith’s report) will bury the report after he takes office. The specter of this possibility hanging over the court could not be clearly confronted. .
Despite President Trump’s own attempts to formally intervene in the controversy so that he could mount his own rebuttal to the limited disclosures, that possibility was not raised. In response to Cannon’s question about why the department was now pushing to share the report with Congress, Shapiro instead pointed to Garland’s general commitment to transparency and the fact that he appointed He cited Garland’s desire to see things through with the special counsel.
Meanwhile, President Trump’s lawyer John Lauro argued that the emergency was prompted by the Biden administration’s desire to “take one last shot here before we go.”
Many of Cannon’s questions to the defense attorney focused on the “conceptual framework” she uses to legally analyze the defense attorney’s claims. He also suggested that the limited release to Congress of what must be redacted under federal law protecting grand jury proceedings could be delayed for additional proceedings.
Mr. Trump and his former co-defendants succeeded in overturning Mr. Garland’s plan to release a two-volume report. The president-elect was unable to block the release of the report on the 2020 election subversion investigation, but Cannon has already withheld classified documents reports that have been disseminated outside the current department.
Cannon dismissed the lawsuit last summer, concluding that Smith’s appointment was unconstitutional. But with an appeal of the ruling underway, Trump’s former co-defendants say even disclosing the report to members of Congress would be detrimental to Congress if the case goes to trial. . Cannon on Friday focused on the lack of a mechanism in the courts to force lawmakers to remain silent about the report’s findings.
If a member went to the House floor to explain what he or she had read, that action would be protected by the Constitution’s speech or debate clause.
This story has been updated with additional developments.
