On Tuesday, Judge Eileen Cannon ruled against the Department of Justice (DOJ), blocking it from sharing Special Counsel Jack Smith’s classified documents report with Congress.
The decision came after a hearing where Cannon expressed skepticism about Attorney General Merrick Garland’s plan to submit the report before the conclusion of Donald Trump’s criminal proceedings.
During the Friday hearing, Cannon repeatedly questioned the DOJ’s urgency in providing the report to lawmakers. She also raised concerns about the potential for leaks and the protection of sensitive information.
“Why is there such urgency to disclose this to Congress right now, prior to the conclusion of the criminal proceeding—which would seem to be the ordinary course?” Cannon asked DOJ attorney Elizabeth Shapiro, according to Politico. She pressed for a clear justification, saying, “At the end of the day, what’s the upside of doing this right now?”
Shapiro defended the DOJ’s decision, citing a “historical practice” of releasing special counsel reports to Congress. However, Cannon remained unconvinced, stating she wasn’t satisfied with the reasoning provided.
Shapiro further insisted there was “virtually no likelihood that the report can leak,” but lawyers representing Walt Nauta, a co-defendant in Trump’s case, countered that providing the report to Congress would effectively make it public.
Cannon noted that the report contained material Trump’s attorneys argued was protected by attorney-client privilege, heightening the stakes of its premature release.
In her order issued Tuesday, Cannon criticized the DOJ’s actions as “startling” and accused the department of taking unnecessary risks with the rights of Trump’s co-defendants.
ABC News reported that Cannon’s decision highlighted concerns about the DOJ’s approach to handling the report. “Prosecutors play a special role in our criminal justice system and are entrusted and expected to do justice,” she wrote. “The Department of Justice’s position on Defendants’ Emergency Motion … has not been faithful to that obligation.”
This ruling followed the release of Jack Smith’s Volume One report on his January 6 investigation into Trump, which occurred after a temporary injunction expired last week.
However, the decision to block the sharing of Volume Two with Congress underscores the heightened scrutiny and tension surrounding the DOJ’s handling of politically sensitive investigations.
As the legal battles continue, this latest development serves as a reminder of the complexities and challenges facing both the courts and the DOJ in navigating high-profile cases with significant political implications.