Mounting delays cast doubt on future Trump trials

Judge Aileen Cannon’s indefinite delay in ruling on Donald Trump’s documents is among the latest obstacles to the former president’s trial in several of the cases pending against him before the election.

Cannon on Tuesday complied with one of the first requests from Trump’s legal team by refusing to set a final date for the trial — leaving it unclear when he will be brought before a jury. Otherwise, she altered the schedule to devote more time to legal issues raised as early as February.

Trump’s other federal charges also face hurdles in reaching trial before the election, with proceedings in his Jan. 6 case on pause until the Supreme Court resolves an attempt by the former president to dismiss the case, arguing that he is immune to process as unique. executive.

And the possibility of any trial of Trump in Georgia in his election interference case took a blow when a state appeals court agreed Wednesday to review a lower court’s decision not to remove Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis (D), following her romantic relationship with another prosecutor on the case.

The mounting issues present a number of new wrinkles in any of the cases that come to trial before the election. If Trump wins the White House, his Justice Department will almost certainly drop all charges.

“It is entirely possible that the Manhattan case will be the only one that reaches a verdict before the election,” said Brad Moss, a national security lawyer. Trump is now on trial in New York on charges he covered up secret payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels to hide an affair.

“The Georgia and Mar-a-Lago document cases are almost certainly behind schedule at this point. The DC voter fraud case depends on how and when the SCOTUS rules. It is possible, but by no means certain, that the fall campaign could see that trial come to pass. Or it could also remain mired in legal fights,” Moss said.

In a Tuesday order issued less than two weeks before Trump’s trial in the documents case is set to begin, Cannon laid out a new timetable for considering numerous motions and other issues raised by Trump.

“The Court also determines that finalizing a trial date at this time – prior to resolution of the numerous and interconnected remaining and future pretrial and CIPA issues – would be reckless and inconsistent with the Court’s duty to fully and fairly consider the various pretrial -pending trials. -trial motions before the Court,” Cannon wrote.

She noted that she still has “eight substantial pretrial motions” she must rule on, including several arguments from Trump to dismiss the case.

Cannon is spending considerable time on issues that some outside observers say other justices likely would have addressed more quickly.

His decision also postpones until mid-summer litigation over how the confidential information at issue in the case will be presented in court – a process governed by the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA).

“By further delaying the CIPA proceedings, Judge Cannon effectively delayed the case by at least three months compared to the timeline last proposed by the DOJ, which brought the case to trial in July,” said Brian Greer, former CIA lawyer. The hill.

“Given this, it will be almost impossible to carry out the trial before the election.”

Now on the calendar are three days dedicated to exploring a Trump motion that prosecutors described as “difficult to decipher,” which seeks to broaden the scope of who should turn over evidence in the case. Trump argues that he needs information from the White House and various intelligence agencies because of political animosity.

“I am not aware of any precedent for a court holding an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the Intelligence Community is within the scope of the prosecution team. The role of the IC agencies is to work with prosecutors to protect their confidential titles in the documents that were compromised by Trump,” Greer said.

“They are victims of crime, not promoters of it.”

While the Justice Department has engaged with Cannon before — it challenged and reversed its order to install a special master to review the documents — the new timeline is not appealable.

“Cannon isn’t going anywhere,” Moss said. “She has carefully ensured that her actions on the merits do not merit appeal to the 11th Circuit, and her procedural actions easily fall within her discretionary authority.”

“No one other than Judge Cannon really knows why she is doing things this way. It could be inexperience, it could be deliberate obfuscation, or it could just be that she wants to be completely comprehensive and cautious in her approach to issues. Another judge probably would have handled it differently, but Judge Cannon is the one the case was assigned to, and that’s how the cookie crumbles,” she added.

And the case of January 6th?

Inaction in the Mar-a-Lago case paves the way, however, for progress in the January 6 federal case.

But that case is facing its own circular path to trial – one that could easily end up in the Supreme Court for a second time.

Trump asked the Supreme Court to dismiss the case, arguing that the criminal immunity that presidents enjoy while in office is maintained when they cease to be executives.

During the April trial, the Supreme Court appeared open to granting some form of immunity for former presidents, suggesting the case could be returned to federal court for further consideration of Trump’s claims.

If that is the case, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan would once again weigh Trump’s immunity argument in light of the high court’s guidance.

Trump’s team could then appeal his decision – setting the stage for another long battle to reach the Supreme Court.

Such a path would be similar to Trump’s efforts to block congressional efforts to review his tax returns, an issue weighed by justices both in 2020 and again in 2021.

It is possible that the Supreme Court could rule against Trump, paving the way for the Jan. 6 case to be revived before the election. Prosecutors recently indicated during a hearing in the Mar-a-Lago case that continuing the trial in a case where charges have already been filed would not violate DOJ guidance against prosecuting litigation in the 60 days before the election.

Georgia Case Faces Potential Willis Diversion

And in Georgia, prosecutors faced another setback when the Georgia Court of Appeals granted a request from Trump and several allies charged alongside him to review their attempt to disqualify Willis.

That battle has already led to a months-long detour that forced Willis and prosecutor Nathan Wade to testify about their relationship.

Trump’s team has not yet filed a motion to stay the trial court proceedings while the appeals court considers their challenge, but it remains an option.

“President Trump looks forward to presenting interlocutory arguments to the Georgia Court of Appeals as to why the case should be dismissed and Fulton County District Attorney Willis should be disqualified for her misconduct in this unwarranted and unwarranted political persecution,” Trump’s lawyer said. , Steve Sadow, in a statement. declaration.

This story originally appeared on thehill.com read the full story