Secrets and Laws Profile picture
Mar 24 11 tweets 3 min read Read on X
Here's the argument as to why Cannon's potential removal is not ripe at this time:

1. She won't recuse herself if DOJ moves for it, & the district chief judge won't either. It would only come from the 11th Circuit via reassignment on remand after a successful DOJ appeal.
2. Obviously DOJ hasn't appealed anything to date. Frankly, there's been nothing to appeal. DOJ is not going to appeal pre-trial & trial scheduling issues, as a court of appeals is EXTREMELY unlikely to second guess how a judge runs their docket. Being bad on scheduling, and...
...being generally hostile to DOJ during hearings is not grounds for appeal. DOJ need a final appealable order (not going to cover the complex appellate issues here), and there's really be nothing qualifying as such to date that's worth appealing.
3. That said, there are looming issues that could set up appealable orders: disclosing witness identities, granting any of the motions to dismiss, & perhaps some extreme version of granting the motions to compel (it'd have to be bad though; 11th Cir. will defer on discovery).
And then we'll have potential CIPA appeals if we ever get to Section 6(c) litigation (concerning what's disclosed at trial).

4. Even if DOJ appeals something, that doesn't mean they'll ask for her removal on remand. It would depend on how egregious her ruling was.
And there's some suggestion in case law that the 11th Circuit would want to see MULTIPLE instances where she was overturned prior to removing her. See the standard below. It's not clear whether they'd count the search warrant litigation.

As a result, calls for her removal are premature. I get the sentiment, & obviously she's displayed some bias, but DOJ can't appeal based on vibes. They need final - & likely multiple - adverse rulings that can be appealed where she is plaining wrong, & they don't have that yet.
If you disagree, that's fine, but I'd like to see an outline of the arguments you'd make in a brief to the 11th Circuit. That brief don't write.
Adding based on some of the comments: DOJ will absolutely point to the prior 11th Cir. reversals if they ask for her removal. I'm just saying it's not clear under the case law if those rulings + whatever she does on her first appeal will be enough, & this will make DOJ cautious.
Whether DOJ seeks her removal on an appeal will also depend a lot on what the ruling is about & its impact on the case. E.g., Cannon ordering the witness identities to be disclosed would be pretty egregious, but it's not like it would mean that Trump will win the case.
Whereas if she dismissed the case based on the PRA, DOJ would have a stronger case for bias as this ruling would result in dismissal. That's all to say, DOJ's decision will be a complicated risk-reward calculus, & and it's much harder decision than people here think.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Secrets and Laws

Secrets and Laws Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @secretsandlaws

Jul 15
The MAL case was never going to a jury with Cannon, so other than the political gift of the timing, today's development merely accelerates the process of DOJ figuring out next steps. However, there are no "good" options for Smith. The question is which is the least worst.
I'd start from the premise that Smith appealing and NOT asking for her removal may be the worst option. She's proven that she'll do everything she can to tank the case for Trump. But asking for her removal is a pretty dramatic step, one that DOJ will not take lightly.
For a refresher on 11th Circuit precedent on removal, please see below from @alegalnerd. This would be the second time she's taken an appealable, fairly lawless step, so maybe it's enough? But she'll just say "hey, a Supreme Court justice agrees w me!"

Read 13 tweets
Jul 14
Just as you shouldn't spread false information, please avoid rushing to judgment until all the facts come out.

For example, lots of people are criticizing the two snipers in the video for not firing earlier. As this shows, it's POSSIBLE that their view was obstructed by a tree.
There was absolutely an F-up here, don't get me wrong. But trying to ascribe individual blame without all the facts is inappropriate. These are public servants putting their lives on the line for the protectee. Let's just let the facts come out before throwing them under the bus.
I would again emphasize to those who can't read: there CLEARLY was an F-up here to leave that roof unsecured. No question.

I'm talking about the criticism of those two snipers for not shooting earlier. We simply don't know what they could see or what they were being told.
Read 4 tweets
Jul 2
As others have noted, the SC's immunity decision may also imperil the classified documents prosecution against Trump. Emboldened by the ruling, he will continue to argue that his designation of certain records as “personal” under the PRA was an official act subject to immunity.
It would be a stretch to say this act relates to a core function, but who knows with Cannon? Instead it likely falls into the middle category of non-core official acts that are presumptively immune from prosecution. Of course, Cannon has shown favor toward the PRA argument…
…so my best guess is that she will find that Trump’s designation should remain immune. Smith will have several counters. First, there’s no evidence that Trump “designated” anything under the PRA, or that he even believed they were "personal." He just took the docs with him.
Read 11 tweets
Jun 26
This Jim Jordan report on the letter from the former intel officers is one of the dumber things I’ve ever read. It doesn’t appear to even have a good theory about what the CIA did wrong, but it assumes that randomly quoting some internal emails will give Fox News what it needs.
First, it suggests that the CIA should have stopped the letter even though it didn’t contain classified information. This would violate the 1st Amend rights of these individuals. If it doesn’t contain classified information, the CIA cannot stop its publication. See Constitution.
Second, it suggests that the CIA should have “vetted” the letter. This is not the CIA’s job in prepublication review. Its only job is to remove classified information. If the info is not classified, whether it’s accurate or not is irrelevant. The PRB is not the truth police.
Read 10 tweets
Jun 23
One of the most frustrating aspects of the Biden campaign to date has been its failure to make climate change a leading campaign issue. The climate crisis no longer theoretical; it’s here. And his opponent is a climate change denier. Failing to rectify this would be unforgivable.
Putting climate near the top of the agenda is first and foremost the moral thing to do; we owe it to our children and future generations. But let’s put that aside and just focus on the politics. While I don’t agree, I understand Democratic reluctance in the past to making…
…climate a central message, as it was not a “here and now” issue that might resonate with swing voters. But those days are gone. We are seeing the impacts of extreme weather, made worse by climate change, on a daily basis in the US now.  And it’s only going to get worse.
Read 18 tweets
Jun 22
One of the most infuriating and under-the-radar things Judge Cannon has done recently is postponing the hearing on Trump's motion to compel discovery that was supposed to be held this upcoming week. Trump filed this motion in January, and she still hasn't ruled on it!
From a timing perspective, this is the most important issue pending before the court. If Cannon orders additional discovery, DOJ will have to search for responsive records from other agencies, and if any are classified, go through the CIPA process again - which could take months.
If the had ruled on this motion back in March, when it was first discussed at a hearing, that process would be over by now. DOJ could have completed those discovery obligations during the lull while the NY trial was taking place. Instead Cannon just sat on it.
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(