Cannon Levels Harsh Critique at Smith’s Team (Image Credits: Pixabay)
Fort Pierce, Florida — U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon issued a permanent injunction Monday barring the Justice Department from releasing Volume II of special counsel Jack Smith’s final report on the probe into classified documents at President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate.[1][2]
Cannon Levels Harsh Critique at Smith’s Team
Judge Cannon described Smith’s decision to compile the report after her dismissal of the case as a “brazen stratagem.”[2] She noted that Smith’s team pressed forward for months, undeterred, using discovery materials from the proceedings despite her July 2024 order declaring his appointment unconstitutional.[1] “To say this chronology represents, at a minimum, a concerning breach of the spirit of the Dismissal Order is an understatement, if not an outright violation of it,” Cannon wrote.[2]
The ruling came after Trump, along with former co-defendants Walt Nauta and Carlos de Oliveira, filed motions to prohibit the report’s release. The Justice Department supported limiting disclosure to internal use only. Cannon granted the requests in part, emphasizing the need to protect the integrity of her prior dismissal.[3]
Roots of the Dismissed Indictment
The case originated from a June 2023 superseding indictment charging Trump, Nauta, and de Oliveira with mishandling classified documents and obstruction. Prosecutors alleged Trump stored sensitive materials at Mar-a-Lago after leaving office and impeded recovery efforts. Cannon dismissed the charges in July 2024, ruling that Smith’s appointment violated the Appointments Clause and his funding breached the Appropriations Clause.[2]
Smith appealed the dismissal but dropped the case against Trump without prejudice in November 2024 and fully ended it against the others in January 2025 following Trump’s reelection. Despite this, Smith prepared the two-volume report for then-Attorney General Merrick Garland. Volume I, on the 2020 election interference probe, saw partial release in January 2025, but Volume II remained under court scrutiny.[1]
In January 2025, Cannon temporarily enjoined external release of Volume II. She set a February 2026 deadline for further motions, leading to Monday’s permanent order.[2]
Core Reasons for the Seal
Cannon cited multiple factors in her decision. The report incorporated voluminous protected discovery materials under a June 2023 Rule 16 protective order, including interview transcripts and records barred from public view without consent.[2] Releasing it risked exposing grand jury information and attorney-client privileged content, with no practical way to review after Smith’s team departed.
She stressed fairness concerns, noting the defendants retained their presumption of innocence since no trial or guilty plea occurred. “While it is true that former special counsels have released final reports at the conclusion of their work, it appears they have done so either after electing not to bring charges at all or after adjudications of guilt by plea or trial,” Cannon observed.[1] Disclosure now would amount to a “manifest injustice.”[3]
- Violation of the 2024 dismissal order declaring Smith’s actions ultra vires.
- Protected discovery and grand jury materials under court orders.
- Presumption of innocence without adjudication.
- Deliberative-process privilege claimed by the Justice Department.
- Unfeasible redaction due to departed prosecution team.
Broader Fallout and Reactions
Trump’s attorney Kendra Wharton hailed the decision. She stated Cannon “properly ruled that the broad disclosure of protected grand jury testimony and discovery materials related to a dismissed criminal case, along with the publication of opinions and unproven accusations by an unconstitutional prosecutor, has no place in the American judicial system.”[3] The ruling effectively halts Freedom of Information Act requests for the report unless appealed successfully.
Nonprofits American Oversight and the Knight First Amendment Institute had sought to intervene for release but were denied. Their appeal awaits at the 11th Circuit. The order requires destruction relief denial but mandates no external sharing by Attorney General Pam Bondi or successors.[1]
- Cannon’s injunction protects sensitive materials from a defunct prosecution.
- All parties agreed against public release, prioritizing due process.
- The decision reinforces her prior finding on Smith’s invalid appointment.
This ruling underscores tensions over special counsel independence and post-dismissal transparency. It closes a chapter on one of the most scrutinized federal probes in recent history, leaving key details sealed. What are your thoughts on balancing justice and public access? Share in the comments.
