President Trump’s classified documents lawsuit faces delays amid arguments over ‘flawed legal premises’

in Submission to courtSpecial Counsel Jack Smith has asked his lawyers to consider whether the former president can claim immunity under the federal records law. He said the case relied on “fundamentally flawed legal premises.”

Smith also said that if Judge Eileen Cannon rules that Trump can cite the Presidential Records Act (PRA) in his defense, Trump could appeal to a higher court and give Trump the right to do so. It also said it would seek an order to apply. Removal from case.

All of this raises the possibility that the trial will be delayed further beyond the November election, when Trump is the Republican presidential nominee.

President Trump faces 40 charges for maintaining classified information after leaving the White House and for obstructing efforts to recover such records. He pleaded not guilty.

Cannon, an appointee of President Trump, has been slow to make progress in the case, but recently told his lawyers that jurors have ruled that Trump could invoke the PRA to defend himself, as his lawyers claim. We asked them to consider two scenarios in which they might be told that it could be done.

smith late tuesday filing “Both scenarios are based on an unstated and fundamentally flawed legal premise, which is that the PRA, particularly its distinction between ‘personal’ and ‘presidential’ records, is based on This means determining whether it is “authorized” or not.” [Section 793] Possessing highly classified documents and storing them in an unsafe facility, contrary to the provisions of Executive Order 13526 governing the retention and storage of classified information.

“That legal premise is wrong, and a jury instruction on Section 793 that reflects that premise would pervert the trial. Regardless of whether possession is permissible under the Espionage Act, the PRA should have no role in instructing the jury regarding the elements of section 793.Based on the current record, the PRA should have no role in the trial. It should not play a role.”

By myself filing, Trump’s lawyers restated their argument: “Under the PRA, President Trump was in ‘unauthorized’ possession of the documents at issue under Section 793 of the Espionage Act. It’s not legally applicable at all.” .

The Florida-based intelligence trial is not the only source of legal crisis for Trump.

Quite apart from the civil tax fraud and defamation lawsuits that have left him struggling to pay off millions of dollars in bonds, Trump faces 48 other criminal charges: 34 in New York for hush money payments; , 10 charges of election destruction in Georgia and four charges of federal election destruction were also filed by Smith.

In both cases, Mr. Trump’s lawyers have pursued delay tactics, seeking to postpone trials until after the election or avoid trials altogether.

Trial in the New York state case is scheduled to begin April 15.

If Trump is re-elected president, there is a chance that the federal charges will be dropped or that he will be granted a pardon. He could not have the state charges dismissed or pardoned.

Mr. Smith’s filing also states that if Mr. Cannon determines that Mr. Trump can cite the PRA in his defense, Mr. Smith would be empowered to appeal to the high court for a writ of probation. is also mentioned.

Cornell University Law Information Institute Define A mandate is “an order by a court ordering a subordinate government official to properly perform his official duties or correct an abuse of discretion.”

“by US Department of Justice“Mandamus is a special remedy and should only be used in special emergencies or exceptional circumstances of public importance.”

In fact, former White House Counsel John W. Dean I got it.Smith had indicated that he was prepared to “remove Cannon if he makes the wrong decision.”

write For CNNformer White House ethics chief Norm Eisen and two co-authors agreed with Dean.

The article said that if Cannon “sticks to even some of these wrong decisions,” “Smith would be entitled to seek review, threatened by circuit court and her removal.”

“It would be highly unusual to remove her from the case, and Smith makes no mention of seeking it in his paper. But he doesn’t rule it out either, and Cannon’s reasoning… Unless he changes, he is so lawless that he has no other choice.”