Cannon seemed to invite Trump to raise the argument again at trial, where Jack Smith canā€™t appeal, expert says

U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon on Thursday rejected one of former President Donald Trumpā€™s motions to dismiss his classified documents case.

Cannon shot down Trumpā€™s motion arguing that the Espionage Act is unconstitutionally vague when applied to a former president.

Cannon after a daylong hearingĀ issued an orderĀ saying some of Trumpā€™s arguments warrant ā€œserious considerationā€ but wrote that no judge has ever found the statute unconstitutional. Cannon said that ā€œrather than prematurely decide now,ā€ she denied the motion so it could be ā€œraised as appropriate in connection with jury-instruction briefing and/or other appropriate motions.ā€

ā€¦

ā€œThe Judgeā€™s ruling was virtually incomprehensible, even to those of us who speak ā€˜legalā€™ as our native language,ā€ former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance wrote onĀ Substack, calling part of her ruling ā€œdeliberately dumb.ā€

ā€œThe good news here is temporary,ā€ Vance wrote. ā€œItā€™s what Iā€™d call an ugly win for the government. The Judge dismissed the vagueness argumentā€”but just for today. She did it ā€˜without prejudice,ā€™ which means that Trumpā€™s lawyers could raise the argument again later in the case. In fact, the Judge seemed to do just that in her order, essentially inviting the defense to raise the argument again at trial.ā€

  • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    Ā·
    10 months ago

    This part really stands out for me, because of where the criticism is coming fromā€¦

    ā€œThe Judgeā€™s ruling was virtually incomprehensible, even to those of us who speak ā€˜legalā€™ as our native language,ā€ former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance wrote on Substack, calling part of her ruling ā€œdeliberately dumb.ā€

    It hints at the judgeā€™s decision not being impartial.