As the legal battle involving former President Donald J. Trump unfolds, the role of Judge Aileen M. Cannon has drawn considerable scrutiny. Appointed by Trump in his final days in office, Judge Cannon’s handling of the classified documents case has sparked a mixture of bewilderment and criticism among legal scholars and practitioners.
Over the past several months, Judge Cannon has made a series of unconventional decisions that have deviated from standard judicial procedures. From rejecting suggestions to pass the high-profile case to a more experienced judge, to entertaining arguments that have been repeatedly dismissed by higher courts, her actions have raised questions about her judicial competence and impartiality.
At one point, Judge Cannon opted to consider a motion by Trump’s defense team to dismiss the charges against him on the grounds that Special Counsel Jack Smith was improperly funded and appointed. This move is particularly unusual given the historical precedent of courts rejecting such arguments, including those made during the Watergate scandal and in cases involving special counsels like Robert Mueller and David Weiss.
“The fact that Judge Cannon granted the amici request for oral argument seems to suggest that she is seriously considering the constitutional argument against the appointment of the special counsel,” said Joel S. Johnson, an associate professor at Pepperdine Caruso School of Law.
Adding to the complexity, Judge Cannon has decided to personally handle all motions in the case rather than delegating routine matters to a magistrate judge. This includes allowing three amici curiae (friends of the court) to present their arguments in person, a practice more common in appellate courts than in trial courts.
Her decision-making process has often been perplexing. For example, in February, she permitted Trump’s lawyers to disclose the names of several government witnesses in a court filing, a move that was later reversed due to safety concerns for the witnesses. Furthermore, she requested draft jury instructions from both the defense and prosecution months before the trial date was even set, signaling a possible alignment with Trump’s defense strategy.
“At this stage in the game, her incompetence is so gross that I think it clearly creates the perception of partiality and her attempt to put her thumb on the scale,” said Tyler Cobb, a former member of Trump’s legal team.
The delays in her rulings and her unorthodox methods have fueled speculation that Judge Cannon might be intentionally slow-walking the case to help Trump. Despite the initially scheduled trial date of May 20 being scrapped, she has yet to provide a new timeline, raising concerns that the case could extend beyond the upcoming presidential election. If Trump is re-elected, there is a possibility he could order the Justice Department to drop the charges altogether.
In defense of her approach, Judge Cannon has stated that a great deal of judicial work is being done behind the scenes.
