🎙️ Voice is AI-generated. Inconsistencies may occur.
The judge in Donald Trump's classified documents trial "took the bait" offered by the former president's lawyers by not outright rejecting their motion to dismiss, a legal expert said.
Former federal prosecutor Kristy Greenberg was reacting to the recent ruling from Judge Aileen Cannon, who threw out Trump's legal team's claim the charges related to the Espionage Act are "unconstitutionally vague" when applied to the former president and should be struck down.
However, Cannon also suggested in her two-page ruling that the motion brings up "various arguments warranting serious consideration," and that Trump's concerns about the Espionage Act should be brought up in "connection with jury-instruction briefing."
The decision meant that the arguments over the Espionage Act could yet to be discussed in front of a jury in a trial. If the jury rules in favor of Trump, Special Counsel Jack Smith's office will not be able to appeal against the decision as the double jeopardy law prevents defendants from being retried on the same charges once they have been acquitted.
Speaking to MSNBC, Greenberg suggested that Trump's legal team wanted Cannon to "kick the can down the road" with regards to ruling on the motion, and it sets up the possibility that the already delayed federal trial could be pushed back further.
"Trump moved here to dismiss the indictment on the grounds that certain phrases like unauthorized possession and relating to national defense were vague, and then Judge Cannon took the bait and said these definitions are still fluctuating, and she can't decide the motion now, and she kicked the can down the road," Greenberg said. "There's nothing vague about these terms.
"What the statue prohibits is clear. It was clear to Donald Trump and should have been to Judge Cannon, yet, again, she gets it wrong. Charged with unauthorized possession of national defense information. It is well established in the law, and these claims have been rejected previously," Greenberg added.
"It was clear to Donald Trump. He said he understood he possessed classified materials, he was told by the National Archives he could not have them after he left the presidency, he was told by former White House members, and he was told by his own lawyers. It was not vague to him."
Trump's legal team has been contacted for comment via email.
In previous filings ahead of Cannon's hearing to discuss the motion to dismiss, Smith's office said that prohibitions under the Espionage Act are "clear," and that Trump in his role as president should have understood the "paramount importance of protecting the Nation's national security and military secrets, including the obligations not to take unauthorized possession of, or willfully retain, national defense information."
Greenberg added that the decision to outright reject the motion to dismiss the argument was a "bad one" from Cannon, adding: "One we can expect to have frustration for the people who want to move this along. She clearly does not want to do so."
Cannon did not issue a ruling on a second motion filed by Trump's team arguing that the Presidential Records Act allowed Trump to designate the documents he took after leaving the White House as his own personal property, and thus he cannot be charged with their unauthorized possession.
The judge, who was nominated to the bench by Trump, hinted during the March 14 hearing that she will also reject this motion, saying it would be "difficult" to justify tossing out the entire case over this claim before it went to a jury.
Trump has pleaded not guilty to 40 charges over allegations he illegally retained sensitive materials when he left the White House in January 2021 and then obstructed federal attempts to retrieve them.
Cannon is due to confirm when the classified documents trial will start. She is expected to push it back from its current start state of May 20.
About the writer
Ewan Palmer is a Newsweek News Reporter based in London, U.K. His focus is reporting on US politics, and Florida ... Read more