Opinion: Judge’s verdict against Trump is astonishing

Canon was previewing this result — in both her question and statement thursday hearing — similarly her first schedule Before the Justice Department gets a chance to hear.But when it arrived, the judge’s written order struck many legal expertincluding myself, is very weak in its legal analysis.
To exercise jurisdiction, Canon had to find “exceptional circumstances.” It refers to a set of criteria that judges should consider.Judges’ decisions are similarly burdened whether to appoint Whether or not to ban the Special Masters and the Department of Justice from owning the seized material – only one of these, in particular, the Special Masters, was requested by Trump’s team. Canon kindly volunteered for the other. Each of these demands also has its own legal requirements, and the onus was on Trump to demonstrate that he was entitled to the remedies sought.

For all these legal issues, Canon’s discussion of these issues was superficial and conclusive. For example, she said, partly because she needs the documents that were seized, partly because information about these items could leak to the press and harm him, partly because these documents determined that Trump would suffer irreparable injuries, as could expose him to crime. foundation.

But the judge did not cite or ask for any information about the documents Trump said he might need. (Anyone surveyed will almost certainly have similar needs without warranting a special master review.)

On the second issue, she said the leaks would harm Trump without mentioning or putting on record the facts that could be discovered that the leaks so far could be attributed to the government and not to Trump. He concluded that it was possible. become significantly louder About the search than the government has. )

Finally, the idea that irreparable harm as a legal matter can be proven through the execution of a lawful, judicially sanctioned search warrant is unprecedented. Again, anyone subject to such a search could claim damages, invalidating any arguments about Trump.

Cannon also showed that Trump could succeed on each of his claims, including executive privilege, which she ordered a special master to issue an injunction against the Justice Department. had to confirm that Trump had met his burden of proof. review.

The judge offered no endorsement that Trump would ultimately succeed in this legal debate. multiple legal reasons that playing card Executive Privileges Theory It will almost certainly fail.
What's really at risk if top secrets are stored in Mar-a-Lago?

Cannon was right that the Supreme Court did not articulate exactly whether a former president could claim such privileges against a sitting president’s opposing decisions. And say the argument could win.

And one of the final questionable parts of the court’s order is the jurisdictional basis Cannon ordered the Justice Department to refrain from not only investigating the seized documents, but from any form of “use,” and It’s not entirely clear how long it will last.

If one of the investigators saw a name on the document, does that mean he couldn’t approach that person for an interview? What if an interview is scheduled? Do you want to proceed? If the team decided on another round of subpoenas based on what they learned, should it be postponed?

Under what authority is a judge’s order ordering the Department of Justice and the FBI not only to keep the documents in question, but to forget any investigative steps they took? 2 weeks ago Did Trump’s attorneys get their act together to file the motion?

All this, assuming that the 11th U.S. Court of Appeals for the Circuit panel hearing consisted of at least two impartial judges who tended to follow the law, would very likely overturn the order on appeal. means

So the million-dollar question for the Justice Department is: Should I Appeal? In making its decision, the Department of Justice is likely to consider two things: Cannon’s opinion may be subject to a similar search warrant that may seek special master review; How much more harmful could it be as a precedent than in humans? How much would an injunction hurt the Trump investigation?

Cannon’s opinion is unlikely to help other defendants. She also repeatedly emphasizes the need to ensure an appearance of fairness and completeness that would probably not apply to more typical subject searches. .

Also, Cannon isn’t legally involved in the matter of executive privilege at all, so it’s not like she’s setting a bad precedent for her opinion.

However, considering the second question, the DOJ may appeal.

Appeal causes delay, but probably not much process of finding and acquiring Coupled with the special master’s security clearance and the time it takes for the master to conduct the review and return the documents.

There is also uncertainty about what Canon has prohibited the Department of Justice from doing (and whether it is legal). So far, the department has been actively filing lawsuits regarding this search warrant. You should appeal the judge’s order to find out soon whether the practice will continue.

Source: www.cnn.com

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.