When
Special
Counsel
Jack
Smith
appealed
Judge
Aileen
Cannon’s
dismissal
of
the
Trump
documents
case,
his
goals
were
modest.
He
simply
asked
the
11th
Circuit
to
affirm
that,
yes,
special
counsels
are a
thing,
and
send
the
case
back
to
the
trial
court.
He
pointedly
did
not
ask
the
appeals
court
to
disqualify
Judge
Cannon,
despite
her
multiple
bizarre
rulings
and
noticeable
hostility
to
the
government.
But
outside
amici
are
less
modest,
and
yesterday
two
sets
of
them
filed
briefs
urging
the
panel
to
kick
Cannon
to
the
curb.
The
first
brief,
filed
by
former
government
officials,
including
New
Jersey
Governor
Christie
Todd
Whitman,
Deputy
AG
Donald
Ayer,
head
of
the
DOJ
Civil
Division
Stuart
Gerson,
FEC
Chair
Trevor
Potter,
and
the
omnipresent
George
Conway,
largely
engages
with
the
merits
—
or
total
lack
thereof
—
of
Judge
Cannon’s
dismissal
order.
It
gestures
briefly
in
the
direction
of
United
States
v.
Torkington,
874
F.2d
1441,
(11th
Cir.
1989),
the
relevant
Circuit
precedent,
and
urges
the
panel
“to
exercise
its
supervisory
authority
under
28
U.S.C.
§
2106
to
reassign
the
matter
to
another
district
judge
on
remand.”
It
ends
with
a
footnote
gently
noting
that
“This
Court
may
reassign
the
matter
sua
sponte,”
and
citing
to
a
Second
Circuit
decision.
In
contrast,
Citizens
for
Responsibility
and
Ethics
in
Washington
(CREW),
along
with
former
federal
judge
Nancy
Gertner
and
judicial
ethicists
Stephen
Gillers
and
James
Sample,
came
out
swinging,
devoting
most
of
their
brief
to
reading
the
trial
judge
for
filth.
“If
the
Court
reverses
Judge
Aileen
M.
Cannon’s
ruling
in
this
matter,
it
will
be
the
third
time
in
under
three
years
that
it
has
had
to
do
so
in
a
seemingly
straightforward
case
about
a
former
president’s
unauthorized
possession
of
government
documents,”
they
argued.
“A
third
reversal
now
will
come
after
Judge
Cannon
dismissed
this
case
in
a
decision
that
hinged
on
ignoring
the
plain
text
of
four
federal
statutes
and
dismissing
as
‘dicta’
a
landmark
Supreme
Court
opinion
confirming
the
Attorney
General’s
power
to
appoint
a
Special
Counsel,”
they
continued.
“A
reasonable
member
of
the
public
could
conclude,
as
many
have,
that
the
dismissal
was
the
culmination
of
Judge
Cannon’s
many
efforts
to
undermine
and
derail
the
prosecution
of
this
case.”
Judge
Cannon,
who
was
confirmed
to
the
bench
after
Trump
had
already
lost
the
election,
did
her
damnedest
to
prevent
this
indictment
ever
being
filed.
In
2023,
she
invented
a
new
theory
of
jurisdiction
to
justify
a
challenge
to
the
warrant
that
kicked
up
more
than
100
classified
documents
stashed
at
the
former
president’s
private
social
club
in
his
shower,
ballroom,
and
personal
office.
The
Eleventh
Circuit
jammed
a
dunce
cap
on
her
and
told
her
to
knock
it
off,
and
she’s
been
marginally
less
outrageous
since
the
case
landed
back
on
her
docket.
But only
marginally.
Judge
Cannon
has
repeatedly
gotten
confused
about
the
difference
between
discovery
and
trial
exhibits,
blithely
allowing
Trump’s
lawyers
to
put
unredacted
witness
statements
on
the
public
docket
at
will
simply
by
attaching
them
as
exhibits
to
motions.
She’s
also
threatening
to
instruct
the
jury
that
the
act
of
stealing
a
document
evinced
the
former
president’s
intent
to
declassify
it
and
turn
it
into
a
personal
record,
and
that
such
a
decision
could
never
be
challenged
in
court
—
dooming
the
case
at
a
point
when
jeopardy
will
have
already
attached,
ensuring
that
it
can
never
be
re-tried.
And,
as
CREW
points
out,
she
resolved
basically
none
of
the
pretrial
motions
in
the
13
months
the
case
languished
in
her
courtroom,
suggesting
that
she
never
intended
to
bring
it
to
trial
at
all,
hoping
that
Trump
would
win
in
November
and
kill
it
from
the
Oval
Office.
They
conclude:
Although
Judge
Cannon
sometimes
has
appeared
to
be
forging
a
parallel
legal
universe
for
former
presidents,
there
is
one
respect
in
which
Trump’s
unique
status
and
global
visibility
ought
to
influence
the
reassignment
analysis:
Those
factors
arguably
make
it
more
important
than
in
any
prior
case
that
“justice
should
not
only
be
done,
but
should
USCA11
Case:
24-12311
Document:
33
Date
Filed:
09/18/2024
Page:
50
of
53
35
2746660
manifestly
and
undoubtedly
be
seen
to
be
done.”
White,
846
F.2d
at
696
(emphasis
in
original).
Meanwhile,
Trump
asked
for
and
received
a
30-day
extension
on
the
time
to
turn
in
his
homework.
He’s
real
busy
in
DC
where
he
has
to
huddle
up
in
a
SCIF
to
review
classified
evidence
in
the
election
interference
case,
they
insisted.
(When
was
the
last
time
he
was
in
DC?)
Plus
he
has
to
explain
to
the
Second
Circuit
why
he’s
entitled
to
remove
his
New
York
criminal
case
to
federal
court
two
months
after
the
jury
convicted
him.
Trump’s
reply
is
now
due
a
week
before
the
election.
After
which
…
???
US
v.
Trump
[11th
Circuit
Docket
via
Court
Listener]
Liz
Dye lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.
Kathryn
Chris
