Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee are ramping up pressure on Judge Aileen Cannon, who presided over the prosecution of Donald Trump related to the alleged concealment of classified documents. They are formally requesting the release of a portion of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s report that pertains to the case against Trump. This move comes ahead of Smith’s anticipated appearance next week for a deposition with the Republican-led committee, where he may shed light on his investigation into Trump’s handling of classified materials and his alleged efforts to obstruct federal scrutiny.
After Trump’s re-election victory last year, Smith decided to drop the case concerning the classified documents, alongside another involving allegations of interference in the 2020 election. Earlier this year, Judge Cannon ruled that Smith’s report section on classified documents should remain private due to ongoing legal proceedings against two co-defendants. However, prosecutors dropped the charges against these individuals, which the Democrats argue should now allow for the release of the aforementioned report section.
The Democrats’ motion, shared with the Guardian, will assert that the rationale for withholding the report is no longer applicable. It states, “The rationale of this court’s prior order thus no longer applies. The criminal proceedings have been dismissed, and the House Judiciary Committee has proceeded with a formal investigation into the special counsel’s operations.”
In tandem with this move, Attorney General Pam Bondi continues to withhold the classified report segment. On Friday, the judiciary committee’s 19 Democratic members, led by Jamie Raskin, sent a letter to Bondi urging her to release it, emphasizing that Smith is set to discuss the report’s contents during his upcoming deposition. The letter highlights the long duration of Bondi’s refusal to release the report, stating, “For ten months you have had zero legal basis for withholding the report. Now you have authorized Mr. Smith to testify behind closed doors about the investigation that the report memorializes – while still refusing to produce the report itself.”
A spokesperson for the Justice Department pointed to Cannon’s prior ruling as the basis for continuing to keep the report private, asserting that during Bondi’s confirmation, Democrats sought assurances that the department would abide by court orders. The spokesperson questioned what had changed, emphasizing a commitment to uphold the rule of law amidst what they termed “political stunts.”
It remains uncertain how Cannon will respond to the Democrats’ motion. Historically, she has tended to rule in favor of Trump during his criminal proceedings, even dismissing charges outright last July. However, the push from the legislative branch may resonate with her, as she has been known to take into account the constitutional ramifications of her decisions, similar to an appellate judge.
Looking ahead, if Democrats regain control of the House of Representatives after the next year’s midterm elections, they could potentially escalate their efforts, having the authority to issue subpoenas. Meanwhile, Republican Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan recently subpoenaed Smith to compel his appearance for testimony before lawmakers, despite indications from Smith’s legal team that he would be amenable to testifying publicly.
The Justice Department released the initial portion of Smith’s report just before Joe Biden’s presidential term ended, outlining his investigation into Trump’s alleged misconduct in trying to overturn the results of the 2020 election, where the special counsel expressed confidence in achieving a conviction against Trump.
