Cannon chastises Smith team, denies ‘gag order’ request in Trump classified docs case
ovp test
Male shot by female at Shreveport apartment
Class to create biodiverse backyard
Rules for outbursts at Caddo School Board Meeting
Testing widget old system
Judge Aileen Cannon chastised special counsel Jack Smith’s team Tuesday for what she described as failing to meaningfully reach out to former President Trump’s attorneys on a motion to limit his speech in the classified documents case after Trump claimed law enforcement had the power to assassinate him.
She likewise denied a motion from Trump’s legal team seeking to censure prosecutors over the matter.
Smith’s team filed a late Friday motion asking Cannon to clarify that false claims from Trump violated his existing conditions of release after he said President Biden and the Justice Department were authorized to “take me out” during the search for documents at Mar-a-Lago.
Prosecutors — who like Trump’s team are required to confer with the other party before filing motions in the case — did not do so until 5:30 p.m. ahead of Memorial Day weekend.
“The Court finds the Special Counsel’s pro forma ‘conferral’ to be wholly lacking in substance and professional courtesy,” Cannon wrote.
“It should go without saying that meaningful conferral is not a perfunctory exercise. Sufficient time needs to be afforded to permit reasonable evaluation of the requested relief by opposing counsel and to allow for adequate follow-up discussion.”
In this image from video provided by the U.S. Senate, Aileen M. Cannon speaks remotely during a Senate Judiciary Committee oversight nomination hearing to be U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida on July 29, 2020, in Washington. Cannon, a federal judge in Florida, has set a trial date for former President Donald Trump to May 20, 2024 in a case charging him with illegally retaining hundreds of classified documents. (U.S. Senate via AP)
Smith’s team asked Cannon on Friday to clarify that Trump “may not make statements that pose a significant, imminent, and foreseeable danger to law enforcement agents” working on the case.
Trump had claimed in a fundraising email that “DOJ was authorized to shoot me” — twisting language from documents prepared ahead of the search of his home that barred the use of deadly force unless agents were presented with “imminent danger of death or serious physical injury.”
Trump’s legal team responded to the motion by accusing prosecutors of failing to comply with earlier orders from Cannon, attaching emails showing squabbling between the two sides.
“There are rules. You guys violated them,” Trump attorney Todd Blanche wrote in the course of the exchange.
Parties are encouraged to confer before any motions are filed in the hopes attorneys may resolve issues before bringing them to the attention of the judge.
Initial outreach from Jay Bratt, a top prosecutor in the case, to Trump’s attorneys noted he “assume[d] you will oppose this motion.”
Top Stories from The Hill
- DNC plans to virtually nominate Biden ahead of convention amid Ohio ballot concerns
- Robert De Niro, Jan. 6 officers show up for Biden campaign at Trump trial courthouse
- After ‘whites only’ job posting, tech staffing firm settles with DOJ
- Widespread disrespect, abuse in maternity care leave mothers with lasting trauma
Trump attorney Todd Blanche immediately objected and asked to meet Monday, writing that “a 5:30 p.m. email on the Friday before Memorial Day is not meeting and conferring in any sense of the word.”
Prosecutors argued in their later motion that Trump’s comments pose a risk of danger to the law enforcement officers who worked on the case, many of whom are expected to testify should the case reach trial. Cannon has declined to set a trial date, arguing she needs to first clear pretrial motions.
Bratt declined the Monday meeting requested by Blanche, responding that Trump’s claims posed too imminent a risk.
“As recently as this afternoon, Mr. Trump reposted a statement on Truth Social again making the false accusations and adding new ones. Further conferral will be a fruitless exercise and does nothing to mitigate the danger your client is creating,” he wrote.
Cannon’s order may not be the final word on the issue. She likewise directs both parties to more directly lay out details on their conferences, avoiding “editorialized footnotes.” She also said the parties must include “no more than 200 words verbatim from the opposing side” describing that process.
“Failure to comply with these requirements may result in sanctions,” she said.
Updated at 12:58 p.m. ET
