Florida – Judge Aileen Cannon, who presides over the Florida case involving former President Donald Trump and the alleged mishandling of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate, has granted another reprieve to Trump. Appointed by Trump in 2020 to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Cannon has drawn considerable attention due to her critical role in this high-profile case.
Cannon initially gained attention when she ruled in Trump’s favor by appointing a special master to review the seized documents, which temporarily delayed the Justice Department’s investigation. This decision was later overturned by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, which stated that Cannon had overstepped her authority. Recently, an NPR investigation revealed that Cannon had attended two “luxury” resort seminars at Sage Lodge Colloquium in Montana, further scrutinizing her role in the classified documents case. Cannon’s office responded that technical issues caused the delayed postings, and the court clerk confirmed that “any omissions to the website are completely inadvertent.”
Indefinite Delay and Legal Implications
Judge Cannon recently granted Trump another reprieve, indefinitely delaying his Mar-a-Lago classified documents case. Initially expected to be one of Trump’s first criminal trials, the case now faces an uncertain future after Cannon ordered a stay on Trump’s legal requirement to notify the government about which classified materials will be discussed. This stay, described as temporary, has no set expiration date, causing legal analysts to worry that it might be a tactic to indefinitely delay or dismiss the trial altogether.
“This case was set for trial on May 20, which obviously won’t happen,” wrote MSNBC legal analyst and former U.S. attorney Joyce Vance. “It should have been ready to try by the end of last year. Extending the 5(a) deadlines indefinitely is the same thing as giving Trump an indefinite trial delay.”
This case was set for trial on May 20, which obviously won't happen. It should have been ready to try by the end of last year. Extending the 5(a) deadlines indefinitely is the same thing as giving Trump an indefinite trial delay. https://t.co/IaOnNKqCKZ
— Joyce Alene (@JoyceWhiteVance) May 7, 2024
In March, Trump attempted twice to get the case dismissed, arguing that it wasn’t clear whether taking the sensitive material was illegal at the time and claiming the classified documents could be considered “personal materials” under the Presidential Records Act. This defense was rejected by special counsel Jack Smith’s office, which cited a transcript where Trump acknowledged the records were not personal. Trump has even publicly admitted to taking the classified documents, stating in an interview on Newsmax, “I took ’em very legally, and I wasn’t hiding them.”
Growing Calls for Judge Cannon’s Removal
Following Cannon’s indefinite postponement of the trial, there has been a dramatic increase in calls for her removal or recusal from the case. Several online petitions have emerged from liberal and progressive groups, highlighting the growing backlash against Cannon. One petition from the Daily Kos has gathered 102,000 signatures, while another led by Demand Justice, Demand Progress, Dose of Democracy, and People Power United has over 40,000 signatures. Additionally, a MoveOn.org petition with nearly 102,000 signatures calls for Chief Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida to remove Cannon from the case.
While online petitions often struggle to achieve their goals, these calls underscore the public’s frustration with Cannon’s decisions, which appear to favor Trump. Before being assigned to the classified documents case, Cannon had already attracted criticism for granting Trump’s request for a special master to review the classified documents seized at Mar-a-Lago, a decision later overturned by a federal appeals court.
Controversial Decisions and Their Impact
After formally taking on the classified documents case, Cannon continued to make decisions that seemed to prolong the process and potentially endanger witnesses. Her rulings prompted Brian Butler, a former Mar-a-Lago worker, to publicly criticize her handling of the case. Additionally, Cannon’s conduct reportedly led to the resignation of two of her clerks, who cited her behavior on the case and an allegedly hostile work environment as reasons for their departure.
Despite the criticism and controversy surrounding her actions, Cannon has indefinitely delayed the case, potentially paving the way for a favorable outcome for Trump. Unless there is some intervention to remove her from the case, the prosecution remains stuck with Cannon’s delays and decisions, which many perceive as biased.
Check also: Trump wants to “buy” the presidency: Makes a controversial demand for policy favors during Florida meeting
Judge Aileen Cannon’s indefinite postponement of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago trial has sparked significant controversy and public outcry. Her actions have led to numerous calls for her removal, highlighting concerns over potential bias and the implications for justice. As the legal battle continues, the focus remains on the broader consequences for the judicial process and the pursuit of accountability for alleged misconduct.
