Appeals Court Denies Request to Prevent Release of Special Counsel Report on Trump

January 10, 2025 TruthUSA

The release seems to highlight a segment of the report concerning the investigation into Trump’s purported efforts to interfere with the results of the 2020 election.

On Thursday, a federal appeals court rejected a request to prevent the publication of special counsel Jack Smith’s report regarding the president-elect’s alleged attempts to undermine the 2020 election outcomes.

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta has now permitted the Department of Justice to release the report, though it did not indicate when it would be disclosed to the public.

Previously, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon had temporarily blocked the release of Smith’s two-volume report, which addressed the investigation into Trump’s alleged attempts to alter the 2020 election results and his supposed retention of classified documents after leaving office during his initial term as president.

Cannon stated that her order would lapse within three days if the appeals court denied the urgent request to stop the report’s release.

In a ruling issued on Thursday, the appeals court also encouraged the Department of Justice to file an appeal if it wishes to challenge Cannon’s ruling.

The ruling followed a request from Trump’s two former co-defendants in the classified documents case, Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, who sought to block the report’s release, claiming it could affect their ongoing legal proceedings.

The focus of the release is expected to be solely on the first volume of the report, as Attorney General Merrick Garland has opted not to discloset the section concerning classified documents while the criminal cases against Nauta and De Oliveira remain in progress.

Following Trump’s victory in the 2024 presidential election, Smith dropped both cases, adhering to the Department of Justice’s policy that prohibits prosecuting a sitting president. The special counsel also noted that the department’s assessment regarding the merits of the prosecution of the defendants remains unchanged.

In a letter to Garland dated January 6, Trump’s attorneys expressed that they had examined a draft of the report and identified various concerns. They asserted that releasing the document would be “ill-considered and unlawful.”

“The Draft Report infringes on essential principles concerning the presumption of innocence, especially regarding third parties unduly harmed by Smith’s inaccurate assertions,” the attorneys maintained.

They claimed that the release of the report would breach the Presidential Transition Act and the principle of presidential immunity. Trump’s legal team also contended that Smith did not possess the authority to produce the report due to his purportedly invalid appointment.

“Smith was not properly appointed, and Congress failed to provide funding for his inappropriate mission. No statute granted you the authority to use a private attorney against President Trump and others, and Smith acted as a principal officer without the required Senate confirmation,” they stated in the letter.

Reuters and Jack Phillips contributed to this report.

Source link