Smith Asks Court to Reverse Ruling in Trump Docs Case

Special counsel Jack Smith has asked a federal appeals court to reverse Judge Aileen Cannon's decision last month to dismiss the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case against Donald Trump. In a brief filed Monday—a day before the deadline—Smith argued that Cannon ignored decades of precedent when she threw out the indictment, the Washington Post reports. In her decision, Cannon said Smith was unlawfully appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland in a violation of the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. Smith filed his notice of appeal two days after the ruling.

• In the ruling, "the district court deviated from binding Supreme Court precedent, misconstrued the statutes that authorized the Special Counsel's appointment, and took inadequate account of the longstanding history of Attorney General appointments of special counsels," the Monday filing said, per the Hill. He noted that attorneys general have appointed special counsels for more than 150 years.

• The decision "conflicts with an otherwise unbroken course of decisions, including by the Supreme Court," Smith wrote, "and it is at odds with widespread and long-standing appointment practices in the Department of Justice and across the government."
• If the ruling stands, Smith said in the brief, it could "jeopardize the longstanding operation of the Justice Department and call into question hundreds of appointments throughout the Executive Branch."
• The filing with the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals doesn't ask the court to remove Cannon, a Trump appointee from the case, but legal observers believe it will do so if it decides to reverse her decision, NPR reports. Her decision is only valid in her South Florida district and doesn't affect Smith's prosecution of Trump on election interference charges, the Post notes.
• The AP reports that many legal experts consider the documents case a "straightforward criminal case given the breadth of evidence, including surveillance video and an audio recording." But there's no chance of a trial before the election even if the appeals court reverses the ruling—and if Trump wins the election, the attorney general he appoints will likely drop the case.

(More Mar-a-Lago indictment stories.)