Judge Aileen Cannon slammed for saying she's 'disappointed' with Jack Smith's motions in Trump docs case

PALM BEACH, FLORIDA: In a strongly worded filing on Sunday, May 19, Florida Judge Aileen Cannon issued a stern rebuke to Department of Justice (DOJ) special counsel Jack Smith and his team of prosecutors in the high-profile case involving former President Donald Trump and the alleged mishandling of classified documents.

Judge Cannon's response, filed in the Southern District of Florida's West Palm Beach Division, criticized the special counsel's approach to maintaining grand jury secrecy and protecting witness safety, asserting that Smith had selectively enforced these concerns.

Judge Cannon 'disppointed' with Special Counsel Smith

Judge Cannon, who was appointed by Trump in 2020, expressed her "disappointment" in Smith’s handling of the case. She stated that Smith requested certain information be kept from the public to protect the integrity of the grand jury process and ensure the safety of witnesses, but had previously disregarded similar concerns.

In her five-page order, Judge Cannon "granted in part and denied in part" Smith's motions related to sealing and redacting defense filings in Trump's trial. The case focuses on whether Trump mishandled classified documents that were taken to his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, after he left the White House in January 2021.

"The Court deems it necessary to express concern over the Special Counsel's treatment of certain sealed materials in this case," Cannon wrote.

Judge Cannon has also indefinitely suspended the start of the trial while other legal disputes related to the case are resolved. This decision has led to significant backlash from legal experts, who have accused her of bias in favor of Trump.

"In two separate filings related to sealing, the Special Counsel stated, without qualification, that he had no objection to full unsealing of previously sealed docket entries related to allegations of prosecutorial misconduct," Cannon noted in her order. "In light of that repeated representation, and in the absence of any defense objection, the Court unsealed those materials consistent with the general presumption in favor of public access."

She continued, "Subsequently, in the course of adjudicating continuing redaction disputes leading to this Order, the Court inquired about those now unsealed filings, which contain material as to which the Special Counsel has voiced (and continues to voice) objections to unsealing. In response to those inquiries, counsel explained that the Special Counsel took the position on unsealing in order to publicly and transparently refute defense allegations of prosecutorial misconduct raised in pretrial motions."

Cannon further stated, "Nowhere in that explanation is there any basis to conclude that the Special Counsel could not have defended the integrity of his Office while simultaneously preserving the witness-safety and Rule 6(e) concerns he has repeatedly told the Court, and maintains to this day, are of serious consequence, and which the Court has endeavored with diligence to accommodate in its multiple Orders on sealing/redaction."

"The Court is disappointed in these developments," she added.

In her filing, Judge Cannon also denied the proposed redactions by Trump's legal team but granted the former president a merits hearing on the redactions in another motion. Trump’s co-defendants in the classified documents case, Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, were also listed in the order.

Public backlash against Judge Cannon's rebuke

That said, the judge faced quite a backlash on social media following her response to Special Counsel Smith's motions.

"She needs to go. Our system can’t simply be there is nothing that can be done," one user posted on X (formerly Twitter).

Another alleged, "What is more ridiculous is that the system can't do anything against such an incompetent corrupt judge."

"I'm about done with the scolding as if they are children that misbehaved," someone else fumed.

"Her briefs read like word salad to me and sound like Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, to put off the case until 2040," a comment read.

"The 11th Circuit should be looking at her," another insisted.

Donald Trump mired in legal battles

The controversy surrounding Judge Cannon’s decisions is compounded by the larger context of Trump’s numerous legal challenges.

The former president, who is the presumptive Republican presidential nominee for the 2024 election, faces 40 federal felony counts related to the classified documents indictment, which were unsealed in June 2023. His Mar-a-Lago estate was raided by the FBI in August 2022.

In addition to the classified documents case, Trump also faces federal charges related to the January 6, 2021, US Capitol riot. He has been appearing in Manhattan court for his criminal hush money trial, where he is accused of falsifying business records to conceal payments made to adult film star Stormy Daniels during the 2016 presidential campaign.

Furthermore, Trump faces 10 state felony charges in Georgia for allegedly attempting to overturn the 2020 presidential election results in that state, which he lost to President Joe Biden.

Throughout these legal battles, Trump has consistently denied any wrongdoing and accused prosecutors of seeking to interfere with his 2024 reelection campaign, Newsweek reported.

This article contains remarks made on the Internet by individual people and organizations. MEAWW cannot confirm them independently and does not support claims or opinions being made online.