In the ongoing legal battle surrounding the declassification of classified documents by former President Donald Trump, Biden Justice Department special prosecutor Jack Smith has launched a desperate plea to Judge Aileen Cannon. Smith’s appeal revolves around the jury instructions related to the President Records Act (PRA), a law that Trump claims allowed him to declassify all documents found in his possession, even those containing national security secrets. Smith argues that Judge Cannon’s request for competing jury instructions is based on a “fundamentally flawed legal premise.”
In his appeal, Smith expresses his urgent need for Judge Cannon to rule expeditiously on the jury instructions related to the PRA. He argues that an immediate review would allow him to seek an appeal if Judge Cannon agrees with Trump’s interpretation of the law. Smith maintains that the PRA’s distinction between personal and presidential records is irrelevant when it comes to determining whether the possession of documents containing national defense information is authorized under the Espionage Act. He asserts that the PRA should play no role in the jury instructions or the trial itself.
“The PRA’s distinction between personal and presidential records has no bearing on whether a former President’s possession of documents containing national defense information is authorized under the Espionage Act, and the PRA should play no role in the jury instructions. Indeed, based on the current record, the PRA should not play any role at trial at all.” – Jack Smith
Smith’s appeal highlights the flaws in Trump’s reliance on the PRA, emphasizing that Trump’s efforts are not based on facts but rather an attempt to create a legal presumption that operates without regard to the actual decisions, intent, or definition of personal records under the PRA. Smith asserts that there is no basis in law or fact for this presumption and urges the court to reject Trump’s attempt to inject the PRA into the case.
Legal experts view Smith’s argument as a pivotal moment in the trial. Former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti describes Smith’s appeal as throwing down the gauntlet, cautioning Judge Cannon to avoid a miscarriage of justice at trial. Mariotti explains that if a legally erroneous ruling is made in the middle of the trial, prosecutors will be unable to appeal the verdict. Smith’s request for a pre-trial ruling aims to ensure that he has the opportunity to appeal if necessary.
National security attorney Bradley Moss believes that Smith’s filing sends a clear message to Judge Cannon. Moss asserts that the PRA angle is a question of law, not fact, and if Judge Cannon believes in Trump’s defense based on the PRA, she should grant his motion and allow Smith to take the case to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Smith’s filing indicates that he has reached his limit with the legal maneuvers and delays, pushing for a resolution to the case.
If Smith decides to appeal to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, it could result in yet another delay in a trial that is anticipated to extend beyond the 2024 election. This situation is something that prosecutors have sought to avoid. The Justice Department is already prosecuting Trump in a separate case related to the January 6th, 2021 riots at the Capitol, while local prosecutors in New York and Georgia have brought their own criminal cases against the former president. Smith’s calendar will now need to accommodate not only these cases but also the potential appeal of Judge Cannon’s latest decision.
Leave a Comment