In a significant development, Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the case concerning Mar-a-Lago documents against former President Trump. The ruling was based on the assertion that the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith was in violation of the Constitution.
The order stated, "Former President Trump's 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 Smith's appointment violates the Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution."
According to The Post Millennial, the order further clarified that "US Const., Art. II, 2, cl. 2. Special Counsel Smith's 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 effect of this Order is confined to this proceeding." This ruling is a significant victory for the former President, who has consistently maintained his innocence in this case.
This story is still unfolding, and further updates will be provided as they become available. The dismissal of the case underscores the importance of adhering to constitutional guidelines when appointing special counsel, a point that has been highlighted by conservative voices who have criticized the overreach of special investigations. The ruling also raises questions about the future of similar cases and the potential implications for the constitutional balance of power.
Login