In June 2023, Biden Special Counsel Jack Smith indicted President Trump under the Espionage Act for the non-crime of a former president retaining his presidential records, which is expressly allowed by the Presidential Records Act. Trump’s predecessors stored their documents in strip malls or in unsecured warehouses. Former Vice President — and even Senator — Joe Biden had no right to the boxes of stolen classified documents in his unsecured garage, office or in the China-compromised Penn Biden Center. Trump kept his presidential records in the highly secured Office of the Former President at Mar-a-Lago. Smith brought his indictment in the home district of Trump and Mar-a-Lago, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. This district has a random case assignment process, and Judge Aileen Cannon received the assignment June 9, 2023.
For more than a year, leftists have grown more deranged in their loathing of Judge Cannon because, unlike D.C. Obama Judge Tanya Chutkan, Judge Cannon refused to roll over for Jack Smith. A federal judge’s most important duties are to ensure criminal defendants get due process, a fair trial and equal treatment under the law. A federal judge’s most important duties is to ensure criminal defendants get due process, a fair trial and equal treatment under the law. The judge’s crucial job is to protect defendants from prosecutorial misconduct and other government abuse. Judge Cannon issued rulings both for and against Trump, which is what federal judges do with defendants every day in America, but this fairness is a mortal sin to the Biden Democrats who want a kangaroo court that will imprison Trump for life. They will settle for nothing less.
Fanatical so-called legal analyst Glenn Kirschner, who somehow served as a federal prosecutor for more than two decades, instructed his crazed followers in May to attack Judge Cannon by providing them with a step-by-step guide on how to file a judicial misconduct complaint. These left-wing keyboard warriors swamped the already overworked staff of the Eleventh Circuit with more than a thousand legally frivolous complaints in about a week. The situation was so out-of-control that Eleventh Circuit Chief Judge William Pryor issued an order requiring the court clerk to stop accepting these orchestrated and baseless complaints.
The New York Times recently took its turn bashing Judge Cannon, publishing a story that claimed two judges had suggested that Judge Cannon give up the case just after she had received the assignment. The story cites two anonymous sources — it remains unclear if either is a judge. The first judge suggested that Judge Cannon should give up the case because the courthouse where she sits at the time lacked a secure facility to store classified documents, according to these sources. Judge Cannon rejected this argument, and there is now a secure facility at the courthouse.
Chief Judge Cecilia Altonaga was, according to the story, the other jurist who suggested that Judge Cannon give up the case. Chief Judge Altonaga allegedly claimed that the optics would look bad given the Eleventh Circuit’s reversal in a separate but related civil case involving Trump’s documents. Judge Cannon again correctly declined this suggestion. The Times’ story is more legally baseless sensationalism meant only to smear Judge Cannon.
Judge Cannon has had the case for over a year, and Jack Smith never sought her recusal. The reason is plain: such a motion is frivolous. Judges issue rulings and are reversed all the time. A reversed ruling in one case does not signify that a judge is or appears biased.
Something much larger is going on here. It is possible that a sitting judge is talking to a newspaper about a pending criminal case. If a judge is indeed one of the sources, that judge faces severe and immediate punishment. We have seen far too many judges opening their mouths about Trump in negative ways, and the Article III Project has no problem holding these judges accountable, like we did with Judge Reggie Walton in D.C. and Judge Michael A. Ponsor in Massachusetts. This behavior is beyond unethical, but leftists only care about ethics when it comes to manufacturing an ethics crisis at the Supreme Court.
If a judge talked to the media, that judge betrayed the oath of office. If the sources are not judges but, say, court staff, they must face immediate termination and a criminal probe.
Judge Cannon has done nothing wrong. If Chief Judge Altonaga or Jack Smith disagrees, either can seek recusal or file a judicial misconduct complaint. But, nothing will happen, because there is no legitimate basis for any of these actions. Kirschner’s sycophants are the only ones wasting time and valuable judicial resources through the filing of frivolous complaints. It’s unacceptable that individuals — either judges or staff — within the federal judicial system are attempting to interfere with a pending criminal case by leaking to the media.
This is not the way our system is supposed to work. We cannot have confidence in a system when the people within it are acting in underhanded ways to destroy it from within. Judge Cannon must, for the sake of the rule of law, stand strong against these spurious attacks. Defenders of the rule of law must and surely will have her back.
Mike Davis is the Founder and President of Article III Project.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller.
