According to the New York Times, Cannon, who was appointed by Trump, was advised by two senior judges on the Florida bench to decline the case when it was randomly assigned to her last June. This suggestion was partly due to concerns about perceived bias in Trump's favor based on her earlier actions when the allegations first emerged. Despite this, Cannon chose to keep the case, which involves charges prosecuted by special counsel Jack Smith.
Cannon's subsequent rulings have faced widespread criticism for delaying the trial, which aligns with Trump's strategy of postponing the case until after the presidential election in November, when he could potentially instruct the Department of Justice to drop the charges if re-elected. One of her controversial decisions includes refusing a gag order request from Smith against Trump, which Trump's former White House counsel, Ty Cobb, labeled "dangerous and incendiary."
The recommendation for Cannon to step aside was reportedly influenced by her previous intervention after the FBI seized documents from Trump's Mar-a-Lago home. She had appointed a special master to review the documents before prosecutors could access them, a decision later overturned by the 11th Court of Appeals in Atlanta, which criticized her lack of authority in the matter.
Cecilia Altonaga, the chief judge of Florida’s southern district, and another unnamed judge both suggested reasons for Cannon to transfer the case. Altonaga argued that her previous actions warranted recusal, while the other judge suggested the case be moved to a jurist closer to Miami’s busiest courthouse, equipped to store classified documents and where Trump was initially indicted.
Despite these recommendations, Cannon retained the case. As a result, a secure facility to store the documents was built at the courthouse in Fort Pierce, where she presides, funded by taxpayers and located about two hours north of Miami.
No comments:
Post a Comment