Article Summary –
Lawyers and former judges have expressed concern over the handling of Donald Trump’s upcoming trial on charges of mishandling classified documents by the overseeing federal judge, citing unusual actions and delays. The judge has asked both sides to prepare jury instructions based on interpretations of the Presidential Records Act (PRA), a move seen as premature and potentially confusing. Trump’s defense argues that under the PRA, he had the right to claim classified materials as personal property, an interpretation widely rejected by legal experts.
Trump’s Federal Case Trial to be Delayed, Say Legal Experts
Legal practitioners have expressed bewilderment over an order issued by the federal judge overseeing Donald Trump’s pending trial on charges of mishandling classified documents. The instructions point to a delay in the trial, according to experienced lawyers and former judges.
Unprecedented Order Issued
“I have never seen an order like this in my 30 years as a trial judge,” stated Jeremy Fogel, former federal judge in California and current head of the Berkeley Judicial Institute. The judge’s instructions suggest that the trial concerning Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents will not start soon.
Jury Instructions Based on Misinterpretations
On Monday, U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon instructed lawyers and prosecutors to submit jury instructions based on two scenarios. Both scenarios appear to misunderstand the laws and facts of the case, according to legal experts.
The Presidential Records Act and Trump’s Defense
The judge has given the parties two weeks to frame jury instructions around differing interpretations of the Presidential Records Act (PRA). Despite the PRA stating presidential records belong to the public and should be handed over to the National Archives and Records Administration post-presidency, Trump’s defense claims the PRA allows Trump to retain classified materials as personal property.
Concerns Over Judge’s Approach
Nancy Gertner, a former federal judge in Massachusetts, has expressed concern over Cannon’s approach. She criticized the judge for giving credence to baseless arguments and ignoring other motions that are causing unnecessary delays.
Trump’s Interpretation of the PRA
Trump’s team argues that under the PRA, classified records Trump is accused of retaining were automatically designated as personal when moved to his Florida residence, Mar-a-Lago. Legal experts and prosecutors reject Trump’s interpretation, with many stating that Trump’s reading of the PRA is simply incorrect.
Unusual Sequencing of Legal Decisions
Judge Cannon’s handling of the case, which involves the first ever charges against a former U.S. president, is unusual according to seasoned judge Jeremy Fogel. He suggests that Cannon is asking for guidance prematurely and might be “putting the cart before the horse”.
Uncertainty Over Trial Date
Cannon held a preliminary hearing weeks ago to discuss the trial timeline. However, a decision on the trial date is yet to be made. The trial is one of four criminal cases Trump is facing as he seeks the Republican nomination for the White House.
Questioning Judge Cannon’s Understanding of Law
Jason R. Baron, ex-director of litigation at the National Archives and Records Administration, claims that Judge Cannon continually confuses the PRA with the Espionage Act. He argues that the PRA does not affect someone’s culpability under the Espionage Act.
Unresolved Issues Push Trial Date
With unresolved issues surrounding the presentation of classified evidence in court, the previously set trial date of May 20 is no longer possible. Prosecutors are pushing for an early July start, while Trump’s team argues for a date post the November election or in August at the earliest.
Appeals Court vs Cannon’s Interpretation
An appeals court has already ruled against Cannon’s interpretation of the PRA in a separate related matter. The court found in September 2022 that Trump could not declare classified documents as personal property.
Recusal Request Considered
Former federal judge Nancy Gertner suggests that special counsel Jack Smith should consider seeking Cannon’s recusal from the case. However, other lawyers find this suggestion improbable as the legal standard for recusal is high and typically occurs only when a judge has a close personal relationship with someone involved in the case or owns a significant amount of stock in a company involved.
Prosecutors Need to Weather Legal Storms
Special counsel Jack Smith may need to withstand whatever legal challenges Cannon presents, relying on the strength of his team’s evidence to convince the jury. This strategy proved successful in the previous special counsel trial against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.
—
Read More Kitchen Table News
