Judge Aileen Cannon Should Recuse Herself in Trump Docs Case, Former Federal Prosecutor Says
Cannon's past handling of the case is at issue, one-time US attorney says
The federal judge assigned to oversee Donald Trump's criminal case over his handling of sensitive federal documents should recuse herself because of her past decisions on the case, according to a former US attorney.
Trump last week became the first former president indicted on 37 counts related to his retention of boxes of sensitive and classified federal documents at his estate in Florida after the end of his term in office.
Judge Aileen Cannon, of the U.S. District Court in Miami, has been assigned to the case.
Cannon, herself appointed to the federal bench by Trump, made headlines last year when she had the case and granted Trump's request for a special master to review the material. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reversed Cannon's order, sharply finding that Cannon wrongly exercised jurisdiction over the case.
It's based on that track record — and not the fact that it was Trump who appointed her — that Cannon should remove herself from the case, according to Joyce Vance, a former US attorney in Alabama.
“You know, that might well mean that the case would be handled by another Trump appointee. This isn’t about who appointed the judge. Judges come from one president or another from a little political party. This is about how the public will view this case,” Vance said. “And because of her decisions in the earlier matter, where the 11th Circuit did not just reverse her, but they said she was out of bounds — that she lacked jurisdiction — they moved extraordinarily quickly to prevent her from allowing Trump to engage in delay.
“I think that alone might hamper her decision-making, but the judge who oversees the case has a lot of authority to make subtle decisions that don’t necessarily come to public notice in time to impact the outcome of the case,” Vance added. “She could impact the selection of jurors. She will rule on pre-trial motions. She will rule on the admissibility of evidence if she was the trial judge.
“And the reality is, in a case like this, the public won’t have confidence whether she acquits or convicts. Better to pass it on to another judge who doesn’t have that kind of a track record here,” she said.
Please support our work…
Also, please subscribe…