A federal judge has dismissed Trump’s classified documents case, ruling that Special Counsel Jack Smith was unlawfully appointed.

From The Epoch Times. U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed former President Donald Trump’s classified documents case on July 15, finding that special counsel Jack Smith’s appointment violated the Appointments Clause.

View Comments (15)

Post a prayer for your state!

“The Superseding Indictment is DISMISSED because Special Counsel Smith’s appointment violates the Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution,” the order reads.

The 93-page opinion and order was issued after days of oral arguments over the special counsel’s appointment and the statutory authority the Justice Department argued Attorney General Merrick Garland used to appoint Mr. Smith. …

Prosecutors are expected to appeal the order.

Appointments Clause

The Appointments Clause stipulates that officers must be nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. It identifies a difference between courts later deemed “principal” versus “inferior” officers and states that department heads may appoint inferior officers if Congress has passed legislation allowing them to do so. …

The defense had argued that Mr. Smith had the powers of a principal officer and had not gone through such an appointment process.

Prosecutors argued Mr. Smith was an inferior officer and that the attorney general had the statutory authority to appoint a special counsel, relying on several different statutes naming independent counsel, special attorneys, and other similar positions, but not a “special counsel statute,” as the judge noted in a hearing.

Judge Cannon accepted the prosecutors’ view that the special counsel is an “inferior Officer” but found that there was no statutory authority allowing the head of the Justice Department to appoint such inferior officers. …

Historic Practice

The judge found the prosecutors’ arguments “strained” and relied on “inconsistent history.”

Prosecutors had argued that the attorney general has historically held the authority to appoint special counsel,  and the judge found the historical examples presented by the special counsel were not comparable. Some of the historic special counsels had been appointed with a confirmation, some not; some were appointed by a president, and some not. Protocols for firing special counsel also varied.

But the practice of appointing “private citizens like Mr. Smith—as opposed to already-retained federal employees—appears much closer to the exception than the rule,” the judge found, as it has only been used in recent years, such as in the case of special counsel Robert Mueller. …

Jan. 6 Case

This dismissal will not affect the second case that Mr. Smith is prosecuting against former President Trump in the District of Columbia. …

What do you think of this ruling? Share your thoughts and prayers below.

(Excerpt from The Epoch Times. Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore from Peoria, AZ, United States of America – Donald Trump, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=52646497)