In a recent development, former President Donald Trump has declared his intention to file a $100 million lawsuit against the Biden Department of Justice.
This announcement follows the controversial raid on his residence in 2022, an event that Trump's legal team has labeled as an unprecedented act of political persecution.
As reported by Gateway Pundit, this legal development comes on the heels of Judge Aileen Cannon's dismissal of a high-profile case involving classified documents last month. The case was notable for its focus on the controversial appointment of Special Counsel Jack Smith, which Judge Cannon deemed unlawful. This decision has dealt a significant blow to the Biden administration and the Department of Justice, casting a shadow over the integrity of the entire investigation.
The appointment of Jack Smith by Attorney General Merrick Garland was seen as a violation of the Constitution, and an act of politically motivated persecution against the former President. Judge Cannon's ruling effectively puts a stop to the prosecution spearheaded by Smith.
In her ruling, Judge Cannon stated, "Former President Trumps Motion to Dismiss Indictment Based on the Unlawful Appointment and Funding of Special Counsel Jack Smith is GRANTED in accordance with this Order [ECF No. 326]. The Superseding Indictment is DISMISSED because Special Counsel Smiths appointment violates the Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution. U.S. Const., Art. I, $ 2, cl. 2. Special Counsel Smiths use of a permanent indefinite appropriation also violates the Appropriations Clause, U.S. Const., Art. I, 9, cl. 7, but the Court need not address the proper remedy for that funding violation given the dismissal on Appointments Clause grounds."
The court found that Smith's appointment did not comply with the Appointments Clause, which stipulates that principal officers of the United States must be appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Furthermore, Smith's use of a permanent indefinite appropriation was deemed a violation of the Appropriations Clause. However, the court did not address the remedy for this funding violation, given the dismissal on Appointments Clause grounds.
The case against Trump originated from a grand jury indictment on June 8, 2023, which charged him with 31 counts of willful retention of national defense information, along with additional conspiracy and concealment charges against Trump and his co-defendants, Waltine Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira. The indictment was later expanded to 42 charges in a superseding indictment.
Trump's legal team had previously filed a motion to dismiss Smith's classified documents charges, citing the "unlawful appointment and funding of Special Counsel." The first day of the expanded evidentiary hearing took place in June.
NBC News reported that Trump's lawyers argued that an officer like the special counsel must be appointed "by law" and that the special counsel should be categorized as a "principal officer" and subject to Senate confirmation. They contended that the statutory text cited by the special counsels office "does not authorize" the U.S. attorney generals appointment of the special counsel.
Judge Cannon questioned whether Attorney General Merrick had any oversight role in seeking the indictment against Trump. However, Smith's prosecutor James Pearce declined to answer, stating that it would be against policy to respond to the query.
FOX News reported that Trump is set to sue the Justice Department for $100 million in damages over the governments unprecedented 2022 raid on his Mar-a-Lago property in Palm Beach, Florida. Trump's lawyers argue that the raid was conducted with a "clear intent to engage in political persecution."
Following the raid, Special Counsel Jack Smith was appointed to investigate. Smith eventually brought 37 felony counts against Trump, including willful retention of national defense information, conspiracy to obstruct justice, and false statements. Trump has pleaded not guilty to all counts. The outcome of this legal battle remains to be seen, but it is clear that the controversy surrounding the appointment and actions of Special Counsel Jack Smith will continue to be a focal point.
Login