A federal judge on Monday barred the Justice Department from sharing former special counsel Jack Smith’s final report on the classified documents case against Donald Trump with lawmakers.
U.S. District Judge Eileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, has announced that the Justice Department will be working with the chairs and ranking members of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees on a report while the lawsuit by Trump’s co-defendants is still pending. It was determined that there was no urgent need to share the information. Pending.
Then-U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland said earlier this month that he would not release the report until the appeals of Trump’s co-defendants, Walt Nauta and Carlos de Oliveira, were decided, but it remains private. He said he plans to share the report with committee leaders for review. Your request and agreement not to publish any information regarding the report.
In his ruling, Cannon said there was no such request and suggested he could not trust members of Congress not to publicly share the contents of the report.
“Given the great public interest in this criminal proceeding and the absence of enforceable limitations on proposed disclosures, the proposed consideration by members of Congress may result in all or part of Volume 2. There is certainly a good chance that it will be distributed to the public,” she wrote.
The first part of Mr. Smith’s report, which detailed an investigation into Mr. Trump’s efforts to remain in power after the 2020 election, was released earlier this month and primarily focused on the disclosure of the lawsuit. Information from court filings was included.
Cannon said the volume of classified document cases varies. In addition to identifying co-defendants that Trump did not have in the election interference case, the report includes “detailed and extensive” information outlining the case against Trump, much of which “will not be brought to court.” It was not disclosed in the filing.” the judge wrote.
Cannon also said the Justice Department said Garland had “limited time” and wanted to “follow the historical practice of all special counsels” by submitting a final report to Congress. He vehemently criticized the claim.
“These statements do not reflect well on the department,” she wrote. “There is no ‘historical practice’ of providing even limited special counsel reports to Congress pending the conclusion of a criminal case. In fact, there has never been a case like this.” do not.”
The judge also criticized the Justice Department’s position that members of Congress should now see the report for “potential legislative reform regarding the appointment of a special counsel,” adding, “There are pending legislation that the Department could assist with.” There are no signs of activity.” It was proposed that Volume II be disclosed to certain members of Congress. ”
“Prosecutors play a special role in our nation’s criminal justice system and are entrusted and expected to deliver justice,” the judge concluded. “The Department’s position on defendant’s emergency motion regarding Title II does not adhere to its obligations.”
The Justice Department did not respond to requests for comment.
Mr. Trump, Mr. Nauta, and Mr. de Oliveira participated in a scheme to help Mr. Trump preserve highly classified documents that he had unlawfully possessed after he left the White House in 2021, and obstructed subsequent investigations. He had been charged with suspicion.
Cannon dismissed the criminal case last year, saying Smith’s appointment was illegal. Prosecutors appealed the ruling, but after the presidential election victory in November, the Justice Department withdrew its appeal of Trump’s case, citing a Justice Department legal memo that said it could not prosecute a sitting president. .
Garland and Smith resigned earlier this month.
