Aileen Cannon DENIES Trump’s request to throw out classified documents case
Channel: Grift Guard
Date: 15/03/2024

Aileen Cannon indicates that argument from ex-president’s attorneys that law is too vague is question for jury at trial

Trump had asked the judge to dismiss the indictment on several fronts, including one dubious argument that the Espionage Act was “unconstitutionally vague” because it gave insufficient notice of the penalties for a former president retaining classified documents.

The other argument at issue at the hearing was Trump’s contention that the Presidential Records Act meant that, as president, he could convert classified documents into personal records, meaning he was authorized to keep them at his Mar-a-Lago club.

But Cannon, who was appointed by Trump, appeared skeptical of both claims. She did not immediately rule from the bench but issued her decision denying the vagueness argument within hours of the conclusion of the hearing.

The claim based on the Presidential Records Act is widely expected to be denied as well. Classified documents are considered property of the US government and Cannon remarked she found it “difficult to see” how Trump’s argument he turned them into personal documents “gets you to the dismissal of the indictment”.

The rejection marks a setback for Trump even if it was widely expected. Defendants in Espionage Act cases often argue the statute is too vague in motions to dismiss in the hopes that they might have the charges pared down.