In a bit of good news on the legal front, the 11th Circuit appeals court granted the government’s petition to block parts of the Loose Cannon’s (judge Aileen Cannon) obviously improper pro-T**** ruling about the stolen documents the FBI found at Mar-a Lago. Law & Crime reports:
The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals is allowing federal prosecutors to resume their review of documents seized from former President Donald Trump‘s Mar-a-Lago residence that were marked classified, issuing an opinion Wednesday that also blocks them from having to release the documents to the newly appointed special master and Trump’s lawyers.
The ruling grants a motion for a partial stay filed Friday by the U.S. Department of Justice, with a three-judge panel concluding that “the public interest favors a stay” and agreeing with prosecutors that U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon “likely erred” when she blocked them from using classified records in its criminal investigation and required them to submit them to a special master.
The panel also said Cannon’s decision to permit national intelligence officers to continue their risk review regarding the seized material while enjoining the DOJ from further reviewing anything is based on a distinction that “is untenable.”
The panel also dismissed Trump’s argument that he would be “substantially” harmed by a stay, writing that because he “does not have a possessory interest in the documents at issue, so he does not suffer a cognizable harm if the United States reviews documents he neither owns nor has a personal interest in.” The judges also said his argument that he would be harmed by a criminal investigation is “unpersuasive,” quoting a 1940 U.S. Supreme Court case Cobbledick v. United States, “Bearing the discomfiture and cost of a prosecution for crime even by an innocent person is one of the painful obligations of citizenship.”
The panel dismissed Trump’s suggestion that he may have declassified the documents when he was president, saying there’s no evidence of that, and also called the argument a “red herring because declassifying an official document would not change its content or render it personal.”
Two interesting paragraphs from the court’s ruling:
Plaintiff suggests that he may have declassified these documents when he was President. But the record contains no evidence that any of these records were declassified. And before the special master, Plaintiff resisted providing any evidence that he had declassified any of these documents. In any event, at least for these purposes, the declassification argument is a red herring because declassifying an official document would not change its content or render it personal. So even if we assumed that Plaintiff did declassify some or all of the documents, that would not explain why he has a personal interest in them.
For our part, we cannot discern why Plaintiff would have an individual interest in or need for any of the one-hundred documents with classification markings. Classified documents are marked to show they are classified, for instance, with their classification level. They are “owned by, produced by or for, or . . . under the control of the United States Government.” And they include information the “unauthorized disclosure [of which] could reasonably be expected to cause identifiable or describable damage to the national security.” For this reason, a person may have access to classified information only if, among other requirements, he “has a need-to-know the information.” This requirement pertains equally to former Presidents, unless the current administration, in its discretion, chooses to waive that requirement. (emphasis added)
At least that panel of the 11th circuit has not yet been corrupted and subverted by T**** and the Republican Party.
The 11th Circuit covers federal cases from
Florida, Alabama and Georgia
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For law wonks, the analysis of Loose Cannon’s improperly biased (political partisan) legal reasoning is based on court jurisdiction under the four Richie factors for equitable jurisdiction. All four factors need to be found to apply for Richey jurisdiction to be proper. The 11th Circuit appeals court wrote:
For the first Richey factor—callous disregard for Plaintiff’s constitutional rights—the district court found no evidence that the United States had engaged in that type of behavior. As to the second factor—Plaintiff’s interest in and need for the seized property—the district court determined that Plaintiff had an interest in at least some of the documents, like his medical documents, tax correspondence, and accounting information. But it made no finding that Plaintiff had a need for the classified documents.
The appeals court went on at length to analyze the 3rd (“whether the plaintiff would be irreparably injured by denial of the return of the property”) and 4th (“whether the plaintiff has an adequate remedy at law for the redress of his grievance”) factors, and found neither of them applied. To be clear, not one of the four required factors were present for Loose Cannon to assert that she had jurisdiction.
One thing to note is that right from the get-go, the first factor, callous disregard for T****’s constitutional rights, did not apply. In getting and executing the search warrant, the DoJ followed the law and did not disregard any of T****’s constitutional rights. Loose Cannon just made that crap up because she supports T****. There is nothing more to it.
If one takes the time to read the Appeals Court reasoning, it becomes obvious and undeniable just how blatantly corrupt Loose Cannon was in her Republican Party attempt to protect T****.
No comments:
Post a Comment