Photo: Alamy
Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the confidential documents case against President Donald Trump earlier this month, ruling that Special Counsel Jack Smith was unlawfully appointed. The case was previously viewed as one of the more serious legal threats against Trump and its dismissal is a major legal victory for him.
Political commentator Jonathan Turley weighed in on the dismissal.
“The dismissal of the classified documents case is a seismic development,” Turley wrote on X. “From the beginning of all of these cases, I have said that the Mar-a-Lago case was the greatest threat to the former president. It is now dismissed.”
Turley also outlined the basis for Cannon’s finding that the appointment of Smith was unconstitutional.
“Cannon finds both unconstitutional elements in the appointment by Garland and the appropriations given to Smith–all without the consent of Congress.”
The ruling by Judge Cannon also aligns with analysis by Andrew McCarthy. In assessing the likelihood of a dismissal in the case, McCarthy stated attorneys tasked with prosecuting federal crimes must be officers of the United States according to the Constitution.
McCarthy pointed out that to be considered an officer of the United States, one must either be appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate or appointed to a position through a congressional statute. Neither of these methods applied to Smith’s appointment. Instead, Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed him under the Justice Department’s special counsel regulations.
Turley also commented on the possibility of an appeal from the prosecution. “We will have to see how Smith will now respond from an appeal to the possible refiling by a confirmed U.S. attorney. Historically, he has not gone quietly into the night when faced with legal obstacles.”