Judge blocks release of Jack Smith’s report on Trump documents case to lawmakers
Washington — A federal judge in South Florida is blocking the Justice Department from providing lawmakers with portions of former special counsel Jack Smith’s report involving his investigation into President Trump’s handling of classified documents.
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon sharply condemned the Justice Department’s proposal in a statement. 14 pages in sequence She is granting requests from Mr. Trump’s co-defendants that the chairmen of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees not disclose the report. Mr. Trump aide Walt Nauta and former Mar-a-Lago property manager Carlos de Oliveira asked Cannon earlier this month to block its release.
“The Department of Justice has never attempted to disclose to outside the Department of Justice a report prepared by a special counsel that contained the substance of Sex and there is a lot of information on the case so far,” she wrote on Tuesday.
Smith, who Resigned as Special Advisor Earlier this month, a two-volume report was handed over to former attorney general Merrick Garland into his investigation into Mr Trump. this Volume 1Related to his investigation into the president’s alleged efforts to subvert the transfer of power following the 2020 election, it was released to the public days before Trump was inaugurated.
But Garland said the second volume in the classified documents case will not be released to the American people because of ongoing litigation involving Nota and de Oliveira. Instead, the attorney general said the report would be provided only to top Republicans and Democrats on the House and Senate Judiciary Committees and only if they agree not to share the information.
Nota and de Oliveira sought to block the full report entirely, arguing that disclosing it would unfairly harm potential future criminal proceedings against them. cannon last week clear the way Asked the Justice Department to release the first volume of the 2020 election case but ordered a hearing to discuss whether a second volume should be made available to lawmakers.
She also personally reviewed that portion of the report and said in her order that it contained “detailed and substantial discovery information” covering a protective order issued in the early stages of the case. Cannon wrote that Garland’s proposal could harm the ongoing case.
“It is not a valid rationale for a term-limited attorney general simply wishing to adhere to the non-existent ‘historic practice’ of issuing special counsel reports while criminal proceedings are pending,” she wrote. “Certainly “
The judge, who was appointed by Trump in 2020, rejected the Justice Department’s assertion that Congress was interested in undisclosed parts of the report, noting that no subpoenas had been issued to make the report public and no lawmakers had sought to review it. Record. There is also no pending legislation on the issue, she said.
Cannon wrote that prosecutors’ statement that Garland wanted to disclose the report to the four Judiciary Committee leaders “does not reflect well on the department.”
“The department has not provided any valid justification for its eagerness to release case information to MPs during ongoing criminal proceedings,” she said.
The judge also said that given the “very strong public interest” in the cases involving Nota and de Oliveira, there was a “reasonable likelihood” that the review by lawmakers would result in the public dissemination of all or part of the report involving confidential documents. investigation.
In the summer of 2023, Smith make accusations Trump, along with Nota and de Oliveira, are suspected of possessing classified documents and obstructing the Justice Department investigation after first leaving office in January 2021. The president and his co-defendants have pleaded not guilty to all charges.
But last July, Cannon Dismissal of prosecution The reason was that Smith was illegally appointed as special prosecutor. The former special prosecutor appealed to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta.
After Mr. Trump took office President-elect In November, Smith asked an appeals court to drop the case against Trump, citing the Justice Department’s long-standing policy against prosecuting a sitting president. 11th Circuit agree to do sobut the case is moving forward with Nota and de Oliveira as co-defendants.
