Aileen Cannon's Latest Court Move Raises Eyebrows

Judge Aileen Cannon's scheduling of hearings in Donald Trump's classified documents criminal case has raised the eyebrows of various legal analysts.

Trump, the presumed 2024 GOP presidential nominee, is facing numerous charges in the case, stemming from allegations that he unlawfully retained classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida after leaving the White House. Some of these documents contained sensitive national security information, and by retaining them, prosecutors have argued that he violated the Espionage Act. Trump has claimed innocence in the case and pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Cannon was appointed to the bench by Trump during the final weeks of his presidency in 2020 and was chosen last year to oversee the documents case. Since then, she has routinely been criticized by observers and legal experts for making decisions in the proceedings that defy precedent and benefit Trump. In a recent example, she has recently denied two motions from the former president's legal team calling for his Espionage Act charges to be dismissed, but in a way that would allow them to be brought forward again later on in the trial when DOJ special counsel Jack Smith would be unable to launch an appeal if she granted the motions.

On Monday, MSNBC host and legal analyst Katie Phang shared on X a note about Cannon's recent scheduling decisions for certain motions put forward in the documents case. In particular, she noted that certain motions to dismiss the trial on various grounds put forward by Trump's team have not been scheduled, including the following: Motion to Dismiss based on Presidential Immunity, Motion to Dismiss based on Selective and Vindictive Prosecution, Motion to Dismiss based on the Unlawful Appointment and Funding of Special Counsel Jack Smith, and Motion to Suppress evidence seized during the execution of the search warrant at [Mar-a-Lago].

In response, various legal analysts suggested that this situation could be used to Trump's advantage later in the proceedings. Joyce Vance, a former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama, warned that if Cannon ruled in favor of such rulings after the case had gone to trial, it could shut down the whole case without prosecutors being able to appeal.

"This is incredibly important because if Cannon succeeds in holding any of the dispositive motions until after trial starts, she could grant them after the jury is empaneled & double jeopardy attaches, ending the case with no possibility of appeal for the prosecution," Vance wrote.

Former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti suggested this was another ploy to help Trump delay the case getting to trial as much as possible.

"Cannon is scheduling hearings for motions filed by Trump's co-defendants but not for motions filed by him," Mariotti wrote. "Her decision not to schedule hearings on Trump's motions when she had an opportunity to do so is additional evidence that she is in no hurry to proceed with Trump's trial."

Newsweek reached out to more legal analysts via email on Monday afternoon for comment.

Appearing on MSNBC on Sunday, Vance suggested that Cannon's conduct throughout the case was sufficient for Smith's team to pursue her recusal.

"The best strategy is a motion to recuse," Vance said. "This judge is behaving in a way that is so far outside the realm that it has left them scratching their heads and looking for a strategy. I think at this point the DOJ ought to go ahead and file a motion to recuse the judge. She's obligated to respond to that in writing if she denies it and then Jack Smith will be able to take it to the 11th Circuit."