Judge Cannon blocks publication of Jack Smith report

A federal judge in Florida appointed by President Donald Trump has blocked the public release of former special counsel Jack Smith’s final report on charges that he stored classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago club after leaving the White House and blocked efforts to retrieve them.

In her order, Judge Eileen Cannon cited a July 2024 ruling that Smith was not legally appointed as special counsel, which led to the dismissal of the criminal case against Trump, as the main reason why the second volume of her final report on his case should not be made public.

Smith obtained a grand jury indictment against Trump on charges related to these documents in June 2023, more than two years after Trump ended his first term in the White House.

Cannon also on Monday rejected requests by two co-defendants in Trump’s case to throw out Smith’s report.

In an order permanently blocking the report’s release, Cannon accused Smith of a “brazen ploy” to compile evidence and other materials obtained during the investigation and “combine them into a final report” to the attorney general after ruling that Smith’s appointment as special counsel violated the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

Mr. Smith took these actions while appealing a judge’s dismissal of a criminal case against Mr. Trump. The Justice Department dropped that appeal after Trump won the 2024 presidential election.

Cannon said in Monday’s ruling that releasing Smith’s report would cause irreparable harm to the former defendants by disclosing “nonpublic” material between Smith’s prosecution and defense teams that involved “remaining contested grand jury and privilege concerns.”

“And in a process where criminal charges have been initiated but no convictions have been reached, fundamental concepts of fairness and justice are violated,” Cannon wrote in his order in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

“The problem is that the disclosure of Volume 2 creates a clear injustice to the former defendants,” she wrote.

“Acting without legal authority, Special Counsel Smith initiated the process of obtaining an indictment in this case and ultimately issuing an order dismissing all charges. As a result, the former defendants in this case, like any other defendant in this situation, continue to enjoy the presumption of innocence that is sacrosanct in our nation’s constitutional order.”

Trump’s co-defendants in the case, Trump valet Walt Nauta and Mar-a-Lago worker Carlos de Oliveira, initially asked Cannon to block the release of Smith’s report. In January, Mr. Trump asked Mr. Cannon to prohibit publication of its contents.

In an interesting footnote to Monday’s order, Cannon referred to the fact that her decision blocking the release of the Smith report could be appealed, and her decision could be overturned by either the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit or the Supreme Court.

“As always, this court will abide by any order from the appellate court in resolving future requests for judicial relief in this and other cases,” Cannon said.

Federal district court judges generally follow orders from higher federal courts and typically do not take the time to affirm the practice in a written order.

Also on Monday, Mr. Cannon rejected a motion by two groups, Columbia University’s Knight First Amendment Institute and American Oversight, to put his ruling on the release of Mr. Smith’s report on hold pending the outcome of an appeal of an earlier ruling that prevented him from pursuing arguments that the report should be made public.

In early February, the Knight Institute asked the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals to vacate Cannon’s earlier order barring the release of Smith’s report. The institute also argues with the Eleventh Circuit that Cannon does not have the authority to prevent the report from being released.

“Judge Cannon’s decision to permanently block the release of this vital report cannot be consistent with the First Amendment and common law,” Scott Wilkens, senior counsel at the Knight Institute, said in a statement Monday. “There is no justifiable basis for continued repression.”

Smith’s attorney, Lanny Breuer, did not immediately respond to a request for comment from CNBC.

In recent Congressional testimony, Smith said he was prohibited from commenting on the contents of the report, given a previous Cannon ruling that temporarily barred its release.

“Jack Smith was unconstitutionally appointed and his illegal investigation was improperly funded with tens of millions of American taxpayers’ hard-earned dollars,” Trump’s attorney Kendra Wharton said in a statement.

“Any fruit from the Smith’s poisonous tree should be properly disposed of and never see the light of day,” Wharton said.

“Judge Cannon’s decision continues a troubling pattern of decisions that shield the president from public scrutiny and prioritize secrecy over the public’s right to know,” Chioma Chukwu, executive director of American Oversight, said in a statement.

“By permanently blocking the release of Volume 2 of the special counsel’s report and denying our efforts to seek an injunction pending the appeals process, the court has ensured that information of vital national importance has been denied to the public,” Chukwu said.

“This sweeping order once again gives the president what he wanted: the continued suppression of the factual record underlying the historic investigation into presidential misconduct. American taxpayers are funding this investigation, and they have a right to know what their government has uncovered, especially on matters of national security,” Chukwu said. “We will continue to use every tool available to us to force the release of this information and protect the public’s right to know the truth through the publication of this report.”