Connect with us

Politics

Trump classified docs judge to weigh alleged 'unlawful' appointment of Special Counsel Jack Smith

Published

on

Trump classified docs judge to weigh alleged 'unlawful' appointment of Special Counsel Jack Smith

Join Fox News for access to this content

Plus special access to select articles and other premium content with your account – free of charge.

By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News’ Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive.

Please enter a valid email address.

Having trouble? Click here.

The judge presiding over former President Trump’s classified records case is holding a hearing Friday to consider whether the appointment of U.S. Special Counsel Jack Smith and the funding of his investigations is “unlawful.”

Judge Aileen Cannon of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida had postponed the trial stemming from Smith’s investigation into Trump’s alleged improper retention of classified records indefinitely. 

Advertisement

Upon postponing the trial, Cannon scheduled deadlines for reports on June 10 and 17 and a nonevidentiary hearing on a motion to dismiss on Friday, “based on unlawful appointment and funding of special counsel.” 

Cannon expanded Friday’s hearing to allow amici to argue before the court, as well as Trump defense attorneys and federal prosecutors. 

TRUMP CLASSIFIED DOCS JUDGE EXPANDS HEARING TO CONSIDER ‘UNLAWFUL’ APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COUNSEL JACK SMITH

Donald Trump and Jack Smith (Getty Images)

Former Attorney General Ed Meese, who served under former President Reagan, filed an amicus brief in the case, in which he argues that Attorney General Merrick Garland’s appointment of Smith as special counsel – a private citizen at the time – is in violation of the appointments clause of the Constitution. 

Advertisement

Garland appointed Smith as special counsel on Nov. 18, 2022 – just days after Trump announced he would run for president in 2024. 

“Not clothed in the authority of the federal government, Smith is a modern example of the naked emperor,” the brief states. 

“Improperly appointed, he has no more authority to represent the United States in this Court than Bryce Harper, Taylor Swift, or Jeff Bezos,” they argued. 

FEDERAL JUDGE POSTPONES TRUMP’S CLASSIFIED RECORDS TRIAL WITH NO NEW DATE

Attorney General Merrick Garland testifies during a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Tuesday, June 4, 2024, on Capitol Hill.  (AP/Jacquelyn Martin)

Advertisement

Meese argues that the “illegality” of Smith’s appointment is “sufficient to sink Smith’s petition, and the Court should deny review.” 

Meese and company noted in the brief that Smith was appointed “to conduct the ongoing investigation into whether any person or entity [including former President Trump] violated the law in connection with efforts to interfere with the lawful transfer of power following the 2020 presidential election or the certification of the Electoral College vote held on or about January 6, 2021.”

Garland defended his move earlier this month during a hearing on Capitol Hill, arguing that “there are regulations under which the attorney general appoint special counsel. They have been in effect for 30 years, maybe longer, under both parties.” 

“The matter that you’re talking about, about whether somebody can have an employee of the Justice Department serve as special counsel has been adjudicated,” Garland argued, adding that other special counsel appointments he and other attorneys general have made cite a regulation that points to a statute. 

REP. MASSIE PRESSES GARLAND ON CONSTITUTIONALITY OF SPECIAL COUNSEL JACK SMITH’S APPOINTMENT

Advertisement

Meese, however, in his briefs filed in several points in the Trump cases, argued that “none of those statutes, nor any other statutory or constitutional provisions, remotely authorized the appointment by the Attorney General of a private citizen to receive extraordinary criminal law enforcement power under the title of Special Counsel.”

President Trump awards the National Medal of Freedom to former Attorney General Edwin Meese during a ceremony at the White House, Oct. 8, 2019. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Meese’s brief was even mentioned in a question by Justice Clarence Thomas in the Supreme Court oral arguments over Trump’s presidential immunity in Smith’s other case regarding 2020 election interference, which the high court is expected to decide this month.

Presenting arguments on June 21 in Florida on behalf of Meese will be Gene Schaerr; Josh Blackman on behalf of Professor Seth Barrett Tillman; and Matthew Seligman on behalf of constitutional lawyers, former government officials, and “State Democracy Defenders Action.”

Meanwhile, Cannon scheduled an additional hearing from June 24 to 26 and set deadlines for disclosures from the special counsel for early July and the defendants’ speedy trial report for July 19 – the final day of the Republican National Convention.

Advertisement

Trump is set to be sentenced in Manhattan after being found guilty on all counts in New York v. Trump, stemming from District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s investigation on July 11. 

Former President Trump sits in Manhattan Criminal Court in New York City, on May 21, 2024. (Justin Lane/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)

Cannon scheduled a status conference for July 22 and another hearing for later that day.

Cannon did not schedule a new trial date.

Trump faced charges stemming from Smith’s investigation into his possession of classified materials. He pleaded not guilty to all 37 felony counts from Smith’s probe, including willful retention of national defense information, conspiracy to obstruct justice and false statements.

Advertisement

Trump was also charged with an additional three counts as part of a superseding indictment from the investigation – an additional count of willful retention of national defense information and two additional obstruction counts.

Trump pleaded not guilty.

Cannon’s move last month to indefinitely postpone the trial comes after the judge unsealed a slew of documents related to the FBI’s investigation into the former president and the FBI’s raid on his Mar-a-Lago, Florida, estate in 2022.

The documents provided a detailed look into the personnel involved in the raid on Mar-a-Lago and a play-by-play timeline of it. One of the documents is an FBI file that suggests the agency’s investigation into Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents was dubbed “Plasmic Echo.”

HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE INVESTIGATES ‘MANIPULATED’ EVIDENCE SEIZED BY FBI IN TRUMP CLASSIFIED RECORDS PROBE

Advertisement

Another unsealed FBI memo memorialized the role of Garland in the investigation.

In a document dated March 30, 2022, Garland provided his approval to allow the investigation into Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents to upgrade to a “full investigation.”

“This email conveys Department of Justice (DOJ) Attorney General (AG) [Merrick Garland] approval for conversion to a full investigation,” a synopsis of the restricted document reads.

Attorney General Merrick Garland (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Also, last month, Smith and federal prosecutors admitted in a court filing that documents seized during the raid on Mar-a-Lago are no longer in their original order and sequence.

Advertisement

“There are some boxes where the order of items within that box is not the same as in the associated scans,” Smith’s filing states.  

The prosecutors had previously told the court that the documents were “in their original, intact form as seized.” 

House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, is investigating whether that evidence was “altered or manipulated.”

Smith also charged Trump in a separate jurisdiction, in Washington, D.C., out of his investigation into election interference and Jan. 6. Trump pleaded not guilty to those charges, as well.

Advertisement

That trial was postponed indefinitely. The Supreme Court is considering arguments on presidential immunity and whether Trump is immune from prosecution in Smith’s case.

The high court is expected to rule on the matter by the end of the term next week.

Politics

RFK Jr. responds to snake-handling critics with new video showing him wrangling a venomous rattlesnake

Published

on

RFK Jr. responds to snake-handling critics with new video showing him wrangling a venomous rattlesnake

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. shared another snake-handling video Wednesday after social media users raised concerns over his earlier encounter with a pair of black racer snakes.

Kennedy Jr. posted an Instagram video captioned, “In response to the many comments about venomous snakes, this video shows how Cheryl and I handled a recent rattlesnake rescue.”

The clip begins with Kennedy Jr. sitting in his home office before someone alerts him to a snake in the driveway.

“Hold on, guys. I’ll be back in a flash,” he says before grabbing a bucket and a small net and heading outside.

Advertisement

RFK JR BAREHANDS A PAIR OF SNAKES ON DR. OZ’S PATIO IN WILD VIDEO

RFK Jr. wrangles a Western Diamondback rattlesnake during a rescue video shared to Instagram Wednesday. (Instagram/RFKJr.)

The HHS secretary then carefully scoops up the rattlesnake as onlookers react in amazement.

After placing the snake in a bucket, Kennedy Jr. later pins it behind the head and lifts it toward the camera while explaining how to identify the reptile.

“His fangs are in there. I don’t want to touch them,” he said. “This is a beautiful snake. This is a Western Diamondback. You can tell by these rings at the end of his tail.”

Advertisement

Kennedy Jr. then asked his wife, actress Cheryl Hines, to bring him a pillowcase before transporting and releasing the snake back into the wild.

ACTRESS CHERYL HINES CLASHES WITH ‘THE VIEW’ OVER HER HUSBAND RFK JR’S RECORD SERVING AMERICANS

Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. proudly displays a pair of black North American racer snakes he caught on Dr. Oz’s patio. (Robert F. Kennedy Jr.)

The Instagram post appeared to respond directly to criticism and concern sparked by another snake video Kennedy Jr. shared Tuesday on X.

In that clip, Kennedy Jr. grabbed two black North American racer snakes with his bare hands while visiting Dr. Mehmet Oz’s patio as Hines watched in apparent horror.

Advertisement

“Honey, honey … why?” Hines yelled as Kennedy Jr. cornered the snakes.

Kennedy Jr. then lunged at the reptiles and eventually lifted both by their tails as they repeatedly bit his hands.

CHERYL HINES SHARES HARROWING EVACUATION FROM WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENTS’ DINNER AS GUNSHOTS RANG OUT

U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Cheryl Hines attend the 2026 White House Correspondents’ Dinner at the Washington Hilton in Washington, D.C., on April 25, 2026. (Taylor Hill/WireImage)

“Black snakes, they’re biting me,” Kennedy Jr. said with a smile.

Advertisement

The snakes continued striking at his hands as Hines pleaded, “Bobby, please! Bobby, Bobby, please,” before later telling him, “You are nuts.”

Kennedy Jr. later posted the video to X with the caption, “Cheryl cheerleads the removal of a pair of Black Racers from Dr Oz’s patio.”

According to the Florida Museum of Natural History, black racer snakes are nonvenomous and generally harmless to humans, though they will “readily bite to defend themselves.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The earlier video showed Kennedy Jr. handling nonvenomous snakes, while Wednesday’s Instagram clip focused on a venomous Western Diamondback rattlesnake, prompting some social media users to question whether the HHS secretary was taking unnecessary risks.

Advertisement

Fox News Digital’s Robert McGreevy contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Politics

Newsom vows to levy 100% tax on California recipients of Trump’s $1.8-billion ‘slush fund’

Published

on

Newsom vows to levy 100% tax on California recipients of Trump’s .8-billion ‘slush fund’

Gov. Gavin Newsom has threatened to tax 100% of the money Californians receive from President Trump’s “anti-weaponization” fund for his political allies.

Trump’s Justice Department had announced last week that it would establish a $1.776-billion fund to compensate allies of the president who claim they have “suffered weaponization and lawfare” under the Biden administration’s Justice Department.

“Anyone from California that receives any of those funds, we want to tax 100% of those proceeds,” the governor told reporters Thursday.

“That’s an action the state of California can take …[and] it’s an action we look forward to taking.”

Just how Newsom would do so remains unclear. He indicated that he would need action from the Democratic-led California Legislature to impose the new tax. If adopted, the measure would likely face legal challenge.

Advertisement

The fund has prompted outrage from Democrats and some Republicans — including Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who said in a statement that the “slush fund,” which would “pay people who assault cops,” was “utterly stupid.”

Newsom’s remarks about Trump’s settlement fund came on Thursday as he signed a bill designed to prevent election interference ahead of Tuesday’s primary.

The bill, Senate Bill 73, restricts law enforcement agencies and officers — including those from federal agencies — from interfering with state and local election officials, such as confiscating ballots, voter rolls or voting machines without a warrant.

The governor said the bill is meant to address “legitimate anxiety” over threats to election integrity after Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco’s decision to seize ballots from the county’s voter registrar as part of a fraud probe. Bianco, a long-time Trump supporter, is one of the top Republicans running to succeed Newsom after the end of his second and final term as governor.

Newsom also pointed to ICE and Border Patrol’s decision last November to stage an event near Dodger Stadium, calling it a “show of force designed to intimidate free expression and free speech.”

Advertisement

“That’s why we have to step up and we have to draw the line,” Newsom said. “We have to clarify the rules of engagement… there are fines associated with this, criminal fines and jail time of three years, so that’s a warning [to] the folks out there that think they can do the bidding of the Trump administration.”

Newsom said he expects Trump to interfere with the upcoming election — noting that the president has falsely claimed that he “won” California in the last election.

“Every single thing that Donald Trump is saying only suggests that he will do more, not less, to intimidate and to impact the outcome of this election,” Newsom said. “I absolutely expect the worst again, because we’ve been on the receiving end of it.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

See Where the Gerrymandering Wars Have Redrawn U.S. Congressional Maps

Published

on

See Where the Gerrymandering Wars Have Redrawn U.S. Congressional Maps

Advertisement

Tap on a state to jump to its maps.

The nationwide gerrymandering battle has escalated in recent weeks, after a landmark Supreme Court ruling in April weakened the Voting Rights Act and set off a scramble to redraw maps in some Southern states that have yet to hold primaries.

Advertisement

Eight states have redrawn their congressional districts since President Trump pressured Texas lawmakers last summer to pass a new map favoring Republicans. Republican lawmakers in two states are pushing to use a new map ahead of November’s midterm elections.

Here is a look at how district lines have changed in each of the states that have redrawn maps, and how the new maps would have fared in the 2024 presidential election.

Advertisement

Gov. Gavin Newsom and Democratic state lawmakers moved quickly to redraw California’s congressional districts in response to Texas’ gerrymandered map. The new California map, which lawmakers approved in August and voters passed in November of last year, was designed to flip five red districts.

The Supreme Court upheld the map in February, dismissing Republican claims that the state’s new district boundaries illegally favored Latino voters.

Advertisement

Florida’s Legislature passed a new map just days after the Supreme Court ruling on the Voting Rights Act. The map creates four more Republican-leaning House seats, splitting up a Democratic-leaning district in the Tampa area and eliminating a Democratic-leaning district in the Orlando area.

Advertisement

In late September, Gov. Mike Kehoe, a Republican, signed into law a new map that slices the Democrat-leaning core of Kansas City into districts with heavily Republican rural areas. Republicans hope to add one Republican seat, ousting longtime Representative Emanuel Cleaver and leaving the state with just one solidly Democratic district in the St. Louis area.

Advertisement

Advertisement

In North Carolina, Republicans control both houses of the legislature and approved a new map in October of last year. The new map could give Republicans an extra seat in the First Congressional District, which previously included all eight of the state’s majority Black counties and was redrawn to include more conservative-leaning counties.

Gov. Josh Stein, a Democrat, cannot veto redistricting plans, per the state Constitution.

Advertisement

Ohio’s bipartisan redistricting commission approved a new map in October of last year that could add up to two Republican seats. The new map dilutes Democrat-held districts near Toledo and Cincinnati.

Unlike many other states pursuing maps ahead of the normal timeline, Ohio had been required under its state Constitution to redraw its congressional maps before the 2026 midterms.

Advertisement

Tennessee Republicans moved swiftly after the Supreme Court decision that weakened the Voting Rights Act. Gov. Bill Lee signed a new map into law in early May that carves up the only Democratic district in the state, a majority Black district encompassing the Memphis area, splitting it into three neighboring districts.

A coalition of voters and Democratic candidates sued Tennessee officials in federal court over the new map, arguing that it was unconstitutional to implement new district lines this close to the state’s Aug. 6 primary.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Texas was the first state to redistrict last year, after President Trump urged Republican leaders to redraw maps ahead of the midterm elections.

Advertisement

The new map, signed into law by Gov. Greg Abbott in August of last year, could add up to five Republican seats in the state. Democrats argued that the new lines cut into majority Black and Hispanic districts in violation of the Voting Rights Act, but the Supreme Court upheld the map in December.

Advertisement

A Utah state judge in November tossed out a congressional map proposed by the state’s Republican Legislature, instead adopting a map offered by a centrist coalition. That map adds a Democratic-leaning district surrounding Salt Lake City.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Alabama had faced a ban on middecade redistricting until after the 2030 census. But after the Supreme Court ruling on the Voting Rights Act, Republicans in Alabama sought to revert back to a map first proposed in 2023 that had previously been rejected as a violation of the act.

Advertisement

The Supreme Court removed a critical obstacle for the use of that map in May, which would most likely do away with one of two majority-Black districts in the state.

Still, legal challenges remain. A panel of federal judges on May 26 rejected the new map, saying that the districts discriminated against Black people and could not be used so shortly before a vote. Alabama has appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court.

Advertisement

Gov. Jeff Landry, a Republican, delayed House primary elections after the Supreme Court’s decision on the Voting Rights Act tossed out Louisiana’s current maps. Ballots cast in the state’s primaries, where early voting began just days after the decision, did not count. New primary elections will be held in November.

The Louisiana Legislature is continuing to debate a new map, but is expected to eliminate at least one of the state’s two majority-Black districts.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending