Connect with us

Southeast

Trump's classified docs case dismissal is a rebuke of Biden's out-of-control DOJ

Published

on

Trump's classified docs case dismissal is a rebuke of Biden's out-of-control DOJ

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.

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

It never made sense or seemed right.  With the wave of a wand, a private citizen was granted unlimited power to prosecute a former president of the United States.  

Advertisement

In a tectonic opinion issued Monday, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon ruled that the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith was unconstitutional.  As a consequence, she correctly dismissed the Florida criminal indictment of Donald Trump over his handling of classified documents.

Smith and the Department of Justice (DOJ) will likely file an immediate appeal to a higher court.  But Cannon’s well-reasoned 93-page opinion establishes a clarifying record of sound legal judgment that will be difficult to overcome.  At some point, the U.S. Supreme Court may be forced to intervene.       

JUDGE DISMISSES TRUMP’S FLORIDA CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS CASE

At the heart of the federal judge’s decision is the Appointments Clause of the Constitution which provides the exclusive means for selecting all “Officers of the United States.”  They must be appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate.  Smith failed both requirements.  

Instead, he was anointed special counsel by Attorney General Merrick Garland on November 18, 2022, without legitimate statutory authority.  His unilateral act commandeered the legislative right of Congress that animates and preserves our revered separation of powers.

Advertisement

Cannon concluded, “The Framers gave Congress a pivotal role in the appointment of principal and inferior officers.  That role cannot be usurped by the Executive Branch or diffused elsewhere —whether in this case or in another case, whether in times of heightened national need or not.” (Opinion, page 91)  

TALE OF TWO CONVENTIONS: GOP UNITED BEHIND TRUMP WHILE DEMS IN DISARRAY

In two seminal cases, the U.S. Supreme Court emphasized that the Appointments Clause is “more than a matter of ‘etiquette or protocol’; it is among the significant structural safeguards of the constitutional scheme.” (Edmond v. United States, 520 U.S. 651; Buckley vs. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1)

In naming Smith to his almighty position, Garland relied mainly on internal regulations devised by the DOJ that deliberately circumvented Congress.  Tradition and “historical practice,” he argued, justified his maneuver.  

However, that was a clever misrepresentation of inconsistent history.  While it is true that other special counsels have operated without specific legislative consent —Patrick Fitzgerald, Robert Mueller, John Durham, David Weiss, and Robert Hur— all of them had been presidentially appointed and Senate approved in prior positions as officers of the United States.  Smith never was.

Advertisement

Belatedly, and in opposition to Trump’s motion to dismiss the case against him, Garland and Smith cited a handful of statutes that purported to rationalize the appointment.  But Judge Cannon methodically disassembled them as wholly inapplicable to a special counsel who was given nearly unfettered authority to do as he pleases.      

CLASSIFIED DOCS CASE DISMISSAL MEANS ‘GREATEST’ LEGAL ‘THREAT’ TO TRUMP IS ‘GONE’: EXPERTS

What concerned Cannon was how Garland’s selection of Smith “imposed almost no supervision or direction over the special counsel and gave him broad power to render final decisions on behalf of the United States.” (Opinion, page 72)   

How is it possible that an attorney general could vest in a private citizen the immense and unchecked power of a U.S. Attorney when, in fact, Smith is not and never was?  His role is not to assist an approved U.S. Attorney but replace one entirely.  

By evading constitutional restrictions, Garland single-handedly stripped Congress of its vital role of Senate approval.  Judge Aileen Cannon remedied this mistake.  In doing so, she built on the compelling contentions of two former Attorneys General, Edwin Meese and Michael Mukasey, who filed an amicus (“friend of the court”) brief.  Their persuasive arguments can be seen writ large throughout the opinion.  

Advertisement

Cannon also expressed alarm at the $12 million already spent by Smith and where exactly the money came from.  The expenses were not doled out by Congress, which means that both Garland and the special counsel violated the Appropriations Clause of the Constitution in much the same way that his assignation was unlawful abuse of the Appointments Clause.   

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

If the decision dismissing the prosecution of Trump ever reaches the nation’s highest court, it will meet at least one justice who had already questioned the legitimacy of the special counsel.  Justice Clarence Thomas expressed serious misgivings during the recent presidential immunity case.  Indeed, Cannon cited it in her lengthy opinion. 

Regardless, the current ruling makes it effectively impossible for Smith’s Florida classified documents case from reaching trial before the presidential election in November or even the inauguration should Trump prevail at the ballot box.  

Federal Judge Aileen Cannon. (US Courts) (US Courts )

Advertisement

The judge did not address the merits of the indictment, which had troubling aspects of prosecutorial overreach in the stacking of charges that seemed weaker by the dozen. 

Cannon’s ruling is not binding on the federal judge in Smith’s other case against Trump in Washington, D.C. over alleged election-interference.  But that prosecution is already stalled by the two recent Supreme Court decisions over the immunity issue and the improper use of an obstruction statute.  

Nevertheless, Justice Thomas’ observation that Smith is acting without authority may breathe new life into Trump’s long-term defense in the January 6th case against him.

The erosion of Jack Smith’s misbegotten prosecutions represents an important course correction in the increasingly abusive tactics employed by President Joe Biden’s Justice Department and his sycophantic attorney general.  These cases, as well as those brought by local district attorneys in New York and Georgia, were always politically driven and legally anemic persecutions designed to delegitimize Trump’s electoral chances.  

Advertisement

They have boomeranged spectacularly.

It is a reminder of what the English philosopher and jurist, Jeremy Bentham, once said, “It is never the law itself that is in the wrong; it is always some wicked interpreter of the law that has corrupted and abused it.” 

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM GREGG JARRETT

Read the full article from Here

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Southeast

Federal prosecutor admits ‘extraordinary’ timing in Abrego Garcia smuggling case charges

Published

on

Federal prosecutor admits ‘extraordinary’ timing in Abrego Garcia smuggling case charges

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A federal prosecutor acknowledged Thursday that the decision to charge Salvadoran migrant Kilmar Abrego Garcia two years after a routine traffic stop was “extraordinary” while defending the human smuggling case as legally justified.

Abrego Garcia, 31, has become a flash point in the national immigration debate since last March, when he was deported to El Salvador in violation of a 2019 court order in what Trump administration officials acknowledged was an “administrative error.” 

The Supreme Court later ruled that the administration had to work to bring him back to the U.S.

After returning in June, Abrego Garcia was taken into federal custody in Nashville and detained on human smuggling charges stemming from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee.

Advertisement

He has pleaded not guilty and is seeking dismissal of the charges on the grounds of vindictive and selective prosecution.

Kilmar Abrego Garcia and his wife Jennifer Vasquez Sura, left, are accompanied by Lydia Walther-Rodriguez, right, of We Are Casa, as they leave the federal courthouse, Thursday, in Nashville, Tenn. (AP Photo/George Walker IV)

A 2019 court order prevents Abrego Garcia from being deported to El Salvador after an immigration judge determined he faced danger from a gang that had threatened his family. He immigrated to the U.S. illegally as a teenager and has been under the supervision of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). 

Abrego Garcia was accused in court records of repeated domestic violence against his wife, who alleged multiple incidents of physical abuse in protective order filings. She later withdrew the protective order request and has defended her husband publicly. 

The Department of Homeland Security has also said he was living in the U.S. illegally and has alleged ties to MS-13, disputing portrayals of him as simply a “Maryland man.” His attorneys have denied the gang allegations.

Advertisement

Tennessee Highway Patrol body camera footage from when Abrego Garcia was pulled over for speeding shows a calm exchange with officers. While officers discussed suspicions of smuggling among themselves — noting there were nine passengers in the vehicle — Abrego Garcia was issued only a warning.

TENNESSEE BODYCAM OF ‘MARYLAND MAN’ TRAFFIC STOP SHOWS TROOPERS’ HANDS TIED DESPITE SMUGGLING CLUES

A woman holds a sign in support of Kilmar Abrego Garcia in front of the U.S. District Court in Nashville. (Getty Images )

First Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee Rob McGuire, who was acting U.S. attorney in April 2025, testified Thursday that his decision to charge Abrego Garcia was based on the evidence.

“I had previously prosecuted several human smuggling cases,” McGuire said, noting that after seeing video of the traffic stop, “I was immediately struck by how similar what was being depicted in the body cam was to those investigations.”

Advertisement

McGuire said Abrego Garcia’s vehicle belonged to someone with “a human smuggling background” and added that the route was “suspicious.”

“It was a large number of individuals traveling in one SUV with a driver who spoke for the group. No one had luggage… the car had Texas plates… the route was suspicious,” McGuire said.

DEM JUDGE IN HOT SEAT AFTER DHS EXPOSES ‘WHOLE NEW LEVEL’ OF ACTIVISM, SHELTERING ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT

Kilmar Abrego Garcia arrived at the federal courthouse, Thursday, for a hearing on whether the charges against him should be dismissed. (AP Photo/George Walker IV)

During cross-examination, McGuire acknowledged that the timing of the charges, coming so long after the traffic stop, was “extraordinary.”

Advertisement

He said he had not previously been aware of the traffic stop but reiterated that nobody in the Trump administration, including the White House or the Department of Justice, pressured him to seek the indictment.

When asked about whether he might have felt pressure to prosecute the case, McGuire said, “I’m not going to do something that is wrong to keep my job.”

DHS OFFICIAL RIPS KILMAR ABREGO GARCIA FOR ‘MAKING TIKTOKS’ WHILE AGENCY FACES GAG ORDER

Kilmar Abrego Garcia, right, and his brother Cesar Abrego Garcia, center, arrive at the Immigration and Customs Enforcement field office in Baltimore, Aug. 25, 2025. (AP Photo/Stephanie Scarbrough)

McGuire also said timing factored into charging Abrego Garcia since he was being held in El Salvador, and he did not want the indictment to go public before all senior officials were briefed on the matter.

Advertisement

“I knew from the get-go that this was going to be a controversial matter,” McGuire said.

U.S. District Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw did not make a ruling Thursday and said he would wait to receive post-hearing briefs from attorneys by March 5 before determining whether another hearing is necessary.

Crenshaw previously found some evidence that the prosecution “may be vindictive” and that prior statements by Trump administration officials “raise cause for concern.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Thursday’s court appearance came after a federal judge blocked the Trump administration from re-arresting Abrego Garcia into federal immigration custody on Feb. 17.

Advertisement

Fox News Digital’s Breanne Deppisch, Jake Gibson and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Related Article

Judge orders migrant deported in 'error' free from ICE custody with criminal case looming

Read the full article from Here

Continue Reading

Southeast

GOP Rep Nancy Mace introduces ‘Death Penalty for Child Rapists Act’

Published

on

GOP Rep Nancy Mace introduces ‘Death Penalty for Child Rapists Act’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., has introduced a bill to authorize the death penalty as a potential punishment for the sexual abuse of children.

“We have zero mercy for child rapists. Those who prey on our most vulnerable deserve the harshest consequence we can deliver,” Mace said in a statement.

The proposal is aptly called the “Death Penalty for Child Rapists Act.”

Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., announces she will run for South Carolina governor during a press conference at the Citadel in Charleston, South Carolina, on Aug. 4, 2025. (Tracy Glantz/The State/Tribune News Service via Getty Images)

Advertisement

“No predator should be allowed to walk away from the most unthinkable crimes against children,” Mace noted. 

“This bill is simple. Rape a child and you don’t get a second chance, you get the death penalty. We will never apologize for protecting America’s children,” Mace added.

The bill would put capital punishment on the table as an option to punish those who sexually abuse children.

REP NANCY MACE SLAPS DOWN EARLY RETIREMENT RUMOR: ‘BIG FAT NO FROM ME’

Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., attends the inauguration of President-elect Donald Trump in the Rotunda of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 20, 2025, in Washington, D.C.  (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

Advertisement

“INTRODUCING: The Death Penalty for Child Rapists Act to amend Title 18 to authorize the death penalty for aggravated sexual abuse, sexual abuse of a minor and abusive sexual contact offenses against children. It will also amend the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) to authorize the death penalty for the rape of a child,” she said in a post on X.

“We’ve spent months fighting to expose Jeffrey Epstein’s network of powerful predators. We’ve demanded accountability and pushed for transparency. Now we’re making sure anyone who rapes a child faces the ultimate consequence,” she noted.

Mace has served in the U.S. House of Representatives since early 2021. 

NANCY MACE CLAIMS NANCY PELOSI ‘WAS A MORE EFFECTIVE HOUSE SPEAKER THAN ANY REPUBLICAN THIS CENTURY’

She is one of the candidates currently running in the South Carolina Republican gubernatorial primary.

Advertisement

Related Article

Nancy Mace proposes bill to make aliens deportable, inadmissible for animal cruelty

Read the full article from Here

Continue Reading

Southeast

Virginia Democrats talk affordability — and vote to nearly triple their own pay

Published

on

Virginia Democrats talk affordability — and vote to nearly triple their own pay

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The Virginia State Senate and its Democratic majority may have voted to nearly triple their pay if a provision inserted into their final budget survives the House reconciliation process and reaches Gov. Abigail Spanberger’s desk.

The development comes as Spanberger has centered her campaign on “affordability,” with Richmond Democrats echoing that they are working to improve their constituents’ personal finances.

Virginia’s legislature itself was founded as a part-time, gentleman’s chamber, where lawmakers would return to their day jobs when Richmond wasn’t holding session.

Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger signs executive orders. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)

Advertisement

Proponents of raising the current 1988-established salary of $18,000 for senators and $17,640 for delegates say the structure restricts who can afford to serve as a lawmaker today. Lawmakers also qualify for a $237 per diem, mileage reimbursements, and coverage of office, meeting and other expenses.

Senators’ new salary would be $50,000.

Republicans were quick to criticize the final budget, with the Virginia Senate Minority Caucus saying in a statement that “teachers got a 3% raise, but Democrats give themselves 300%.” The actual increase would be closer to 178%, though one could say the new salary would be 300% of the original. 

“The affordability hoax just gets worse and worse,” the caucus said, adding that the chamber’s majority killed a repeal of the car tax — something GOP gubernatorial nominee Winsome Sears ran on — while increasing the state budget by $1 billion overall.

Sen. Mark Obenshain, R-Rockingham, told WVTF it is the “wrong time” to address lawmaker pay.

Advertisement

NEW DEM STAR’S QUICK HARD-LEFT TURN AFTER ‘MODERATE’ CAMPAIGN WON HER COVETED RESPONSE TO TRUMP: LAWMAKER

 “It’s supposed to be affordability for working families across Virginia, not members of the General Assembly,” he said.

Virginia’s legislature — the oldest continuous legislative body in the New World — has been making laws since its inception as the House of Burgesses in Colonial Williamsburg, where Spanberger gave the Democratic Party’s State of the Union response.

In her speech, she claimed President Donald Trump is the one “enriching himself, his family and his friends” and said Republicans are the ones “making your life more expensive.”

“I traveled to every corner of Virginia, and I heard the same pressing concern everywhere: costs are too high. In housing, healthcare, energy, and childcare,” she said.

Advertisement

“Americans deserve to know that their leaders are focused on addressing the problems that keep them up at night.”

“Democrats across the country are laser-focused on affordability — in our nation’s capital and in state capitals and communities across America,” Spanberger said Tuesday.

The pay raise could be moot if the Democrat-controlled House of Delegates does not amend its own budget proposal to include the provision.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The House’s budget includes $137 million for expanded childcare access, a minimum wage increase to $13.75 in 2027 and $15 in 2029, and a $20 million appropriation for state employees’ and home health care workers’ collective bargaining, according to Washington’s ABC affiliate.

Advertisement

Fox News Digital reached out to the governor, as well as the House and Senate minority leaders, for further comment.

Related Article

Virginia Democrats seek dozens of new tax hikes, including on dog walking and dry cleaning

Read the full article from Here

Continue Reading

Trending