The judge appointed by Trump would initially hear the documents case
Former President Donald J. Trump’s criminal charges against allegations arising from his handling of classified documents will be reviewed — at least initially — by a federal judge who was criticized by a higher court for giving him a string of strings during the early stages of the investigation. made unusually favorable statements, according to five people familiar with the matter.
The judge, Aileen M. Cannon, who nominated Trump himself to the bench in 2020, his last year in office, is scheduled, at least for now, to hear the former president’s first appearance in Federal District Court in Miami on Tuesday before to sit. , the people said. But it was not clear whether Judge Cannon would remain assigned to handle Mr. Trump’s entire case.
Judge Cannon’s involvement was previously reported by ABC News.
While judges typically receive cases through arbitrary process, it is also common practice to transfer incoming cases to judges who have heard related cases.
Last fall, Judge Cannon presided over an unusual and highly contentious legal battle between the Justice Department and Trump’s attorneys over whether or not to suspend the document review so an outside arbitrator could review thousands of files processed by the FBI in Mar-a Lago had been seized. , Mr. Trump’s private club and residence in Florida.
Judge Cannon, ruling for Mr. Trump, effectively froze a significant portion of the administration’s investigation, barring prosecutors from using the materials seized at Mar-a-Lago for any “investigative purpose” related to with the case against Mr. Trump to the work of Mr. Trump. arbitrator, known as a special master, was over.
An Atlanta appeals court eventually overruled Judge Cannon, struck down the special master review and allowed the investigation into Mr. Trump to resume unopposed.
In a highly critical decision, a three-member appellate court panel said Judge Cannon never had proper authority to intervene in the case and order the review. The court also reprimanded her for preventing federal investigators from using the files seized at Mar-a-Lago, saying there was no justification for treating Mr. Trump any differently than any other target of a search warrant.
“It is indeed extraordinary for a warrant to be executed in the home of a former president, but not in a way that affects our legal analysis or otherwise authorizes the judiciary to interfere in an ongoing investigation,” the court wrote.