by WorldTribune Staff, July 15, 2024 Contract With Our Readers
A federal judge in Florida on Monday dismissed the documents case against former President Donald Trump, ruling that special counsel Jack Smith was not appointed in a constitutional or lawful manner.
Judge Aileen Cannon granted a motion by Trump’s legal team after ruling that Smith, who was not confirmed by the U.S. Senate and was not a U.S. Attorney when appointed, could not lawfully bring the indictment against Trump in federal court.
Judge Aileen CannonIn her ruling, Judge Cannon wrote:
“In the end, it seems the Executive’s growing comfort in appointing “regulatory” special counsels in the more recent era has followed an ad hoc pattern with little judicial scrutiny. Perhaps this can be traced back to reliance on stray dictum in Nixon that perpetuated in subsequent cases. Perhaps it can be justified practically by the urgency of national crises. Or perhaps it can be explained by the relative infrequency of these types of investigations, by congressional inattention, or by the important roles that special-counsel-like figures have played in our country’s history. Regardless of the explanation, the present Motion requires careful analysis of the statutory landscape to ensure compliance with the Constitution, and the Court has endeavored to do so with care.
“The Court thus returns to where it started. The Appointments Clause is “among the significant structural safeguards of the constitutional scheme.” Edmond, 520 U.S. at 659. So too is the Appropriations Clause, which carefully separates Congressional control of the “purse” from Executive control of the “sword.” The Federalist No. 78 (Alexander Hamilton). The consequences of relaxing either of those critical provisions are serious, both in this case and beyond. As Justice Frankfurter explained in his opinion in Youngstown, “[t]he accretion of dangerous power does not come in a day. It does come, however slowly, from the generative force of unchecked disregard of the restrictions that fence in even the most disinterested assertion of authority.” Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579, 594 (1952) (Frankfurter, J., concurring). “[I]llegitimate and unconstitutional practices get their first footing . . . by silent approaches and slight deviations from legal modes of procedure.” Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616, 635 (1886).”
In response to the ruling, Trump wrote in a Truth Social post:
As we move forward in Uniting our Nation after the horrific events on Saturday, this dismissal of the Lawless Indictment in Florida should be just the first step, followed quickly by the dismissal of ALL the Witch Hunts — The January 6th Hoax in Washington, D.C., the Manhattan D.A.’s Zombie Case, the New York A.G. Scam, Fake Claims about a woman I never met (a decades old photo in a line with her then husband does not count), and the Georgia “Perfect” Phone Call charges. The Democrat Justice Department coordinated ALL of these Political Attacks, which are an Election Interference conspiracy against Joe Biden’s Political Opponent, ME. Let us come together to END all Weaponization of our Justice System, and Make America Great Again!
Last month, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas suggested in a concurring opinion in Fischer v. United States — which said the Department of Justice had abused its power in prosecuting January 6th defendants under a statute about witness tampering — that Smith’s appointment was likely unconstitutional.
Justice Thomas wrote: “No former President has faced criminal prosecution for his acts while in office in the more than 200 years since the founding of our country. And, that is so despite numerous past Presidents taking actions that many would argue constitute crimes. If this unprecedented prosecution is to proceed, it must be conducted by someone duly authorized to do so by the American people. The lower courts should thus answer these essential questions concerning the Special Counsel’s appointment before proceeding. [There] are serious questions whether the Attorney General has violated that structure by creating an office of the Special Counsel that has not been established by law.”
Support American Journalism
Prior to being appointed the prosecute the documents case, Smith was working as a prosecutor at the International Criminal Court at The Hague. He had been a U.S. Attorney in Nashville during the Obama administration but resigned in the first year of the Trump administration.
Investigative reporter Julie Kelly noted in a social media post:
“The only person who should be happier about Judge Cannon dismissing the documents case is Jack Smith. A dirty, sloppy, corrupt investigation from start to finish.
“She is a hero who didn’t stop exposing the malfeasance and bad behavior of Special Counsel’s team and FBI.
“Smith should thank his lucky stars (to the extent he has any) that this garbage case won’t go to trial. He’ll probably file an appeal of her order to save face but he has to be the last person on earth to want this case to proceed.”
The dismissal of the classified documents case is a seismic development. From the beginning of all of these cases, I have said that the Mar-a-Lago case was the greatest threat to the former president. It is now dismissed.
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) July 15, 2024
Jack Smith—who has nothing but a humiliating losing streak before SCOTUS—takes pot shots at Clarence Thomas for his concurring opinion in immunity decision that raised the unconstitutionality of Smith’s appointment.
This is in response to Judge Cannon asking for additional… pic.twitter.com/B5xqtoLvjp
— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) July 12, 2024
Documents case against Trump dismissed after courts identified multiple issues added by Editor Two on July 15, 2024
View all posts by Editor Two →
Source link