Aileen Cannon Is Who Critics Feared She Was | The judge handling Trump’s classified-documents case has shown that she’s not fit for the task

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/aileen-cannon-trump-classified-document-case/678750/

35 comments

  1. Article sections:

    >Cannon’s selection immediately stirred up worries. She had little trial experience, having been appointed to the bench at just 39. She was an appointee of Trump himself. And she had already raised concerns with her rulings in favor of Trump in a precursor to the case, which were later reversed by a sharply critical appeals court. These objections might have been premature: Interpreting a judge’s mindset, and assessing her shortcomings, from the outside can be difficult. But after a year of action—and, perhaps more important, inaction—from Cannon, it seems that many of the worst fears about her were not just well founded but understated: Her track record in the case has been extremely favorable to Trump, to a degree that undermines any faith in her ability to adjudicate it fairly going forward.
    >
    >The latest astonishing development is a New York Times report yesterday that two other federal judges in Florida’s Southern District sought to persuade her to step aside from the case and let another jurist take it. One colleague argued to Cannon that it would be better for a judge in Miami, rather than her satellite Fort Pierce courthouse, to deal with the case, in part because the Miami courthouse has a facility for sensitive documents, the paper reported. When Cannon demurred, the chief judge of the district called her and argued that her reversed decision earlier meant that her having this case would look bad. She again declined to hand it off.
    >
    >Whether Cannon’s colleagues were concerned about inexperience or bias is not clear from the reporting, but what is striking is that they seem to have reached the same conclusion that many outsiders did at the time and later: Cannon has no business presiding over the case.
    >
    >…
    >
    >If Smith’s filings show a rising irritation, outsiders who have no need to be polite have not been. “The fact these motions are even being entertained with a hearing is itself ridiculous,” the national-security lawyer Bradley Moss told CNN. “The magnitude of the legal mistakes that are happening is weird. They’re always in the same direction, right? The legal mistakes are always Trump-favorable,” the University of Texas law professor Lee Kovarsky told New York. “It’s clear that she is going in a ridiculous direction,” Nancy Gertner, a retired federal judge, told Politico. The attorneys Dennis Aftergut and Laurence Tribe wrote in Slate that Cannon “is quietly sabotaging” the case. “Judge Cannon is proving that she is not fit for this moment,” the former CIA attorney Brian Greer wrote in the Times.
    >
    >That these commentators would be critical of Cannon is perhaps no surprise—they include Democratic appointees, Trump critics, and federal prosecutors, all people inclined to be sympathetic to Smith. What affirms their concerns is that Cannon’s colleagues—people who intimately know the court, the law, and the judge herself—evidently agreed.

    It’s amazing that in the 21st century that the selection of judges is still such a partisan exercise. This, along with the drawing of electoral districts, should be given over to non-partisan committees tasked and resourced appropriately. Leaving appointments in the hands of politicians and the political process gets us to points like this where someone objectively unqualified to sit on any bench is sitting in judgment on critical issues of the day.

  2. She is perfectly fit for the task. Her job is to delay, delay, delay, delay. And she’s been perfect at that. She needs to not make any stupid decisions that can be appealed in the process and get kicked off. And she’s pretty much done that.

  3. Trust me, not all Michigan Law grads are this bad/unprofessional. Don’t let her reflect badly on all of us, lol.

    In all seriousness, age, inexperience and her basically being hand-selected by Republicans to do what she’s doing in these types of situations–the real problems. She does kind of make Michigan look like they just handed us all degrees, though. I was there when she was–we were definitely challenged.

  4. She is absolutely fit for the task.

    Just not the task you want.

    But for the task that Trump wants. Perfect for any would be El Presidente Batista/Perón/Franco type.

  5. For those who are still on the fence, or thinking they may not vote for Biden in November, I have 5 words for you:

    Supreme Court Justice Aileen Cannon.

    If Trump wins, don’t think for a second that she wouldn’t be a serious contender for Thomas’s or Alito’s seat when they inevitably retire.

  7. We made it 247 years on the assumption that the rules written by the founding fathers would be acted upon by people with honor.

    Then came a trust fund loser from Queens and it started to crumble.

  8. I mean we know this is pretty much their plan now. Just try to get as many MAGA people into government roles and hope stuff like this happens lol

  9. Well yeah. She was never fit for the task. She was put in place to protect Trump’s ass because of all the crimes he was committing

  10. How common is it for judges to be charged with criminal conspiracy?

  11. Cannon flat out doesn’t pass the appearance of a conflict of interest test.

  12. Forget “the task,” she isn’t fit to be a judge. She’s not qualified, she lacks the integrity, she’s a threat to the legal system.

  13. I feel like she doesn’t know enough about the law/is not sufficiently competent to be delaying this as effectively as she is without someone from the Federalist Society directing her behind the scenes.

    Lawfare has been covering these shenanigans really well. The view there seems to be that it would be helpful to Smith if she were to dismiss the charges based on his appointment being unconstitutional, because it would be the best opportunity to appeal to the 11th circuit and get her booted off the case.

  18. We’ve known this for years. What are we doing about it?

  19. The University of Michigan does it again! The same law school that gave us Ann Coulter.

  21. Should have ever passed the US Senate vote. Thanks, Mitch.

  22. Then why was she allowed to get this case? And don’t say this is how this works. If Trump ends up president again and destroy democracy and american elections moving on, people will say “Oh, we could have stopped it but… that’s how it worked”. lol

  23. I’ve never seen this, and I doubt any experienced lawyers have as well. Seen a judge give such incredible favoritism to a defendant.

    Cannon has tried to derail this case at every avenue while also doing everything she can to avoid anything anything that the prosecution can appeal.

  24. Are you still considered late to the party if the building it took place in has been demolished and replaced?

  25. Wrong. She’s shown she is fit for the task Trump assigned her: make sure things go his way.

  26. so I guess in the light of trump I really hope that those in power that don’t want this to happen again take action to adjust our laws and requirements for certain positions to stop this type of corruption.

  27. The United States law system is a corrupt farce taken over politically by the right.

  28. Is there a law against judges taking direction from people outside of a case? Seems like there kinda should be… otherwise what’s the point of all the effort we take to select them. You could just put any old hack in the seat and pull their strings from the shadows (or right out in the open).

  29. she’s definitely fit for the task. it’s why he put her there. 

  30. Prior to this she had about 4 days of trial experience as a judge.

    Even her bosses came to her and said “You should recuse yourself because of the optics”

    She continues to issue “paperless” orders as a delaying tactic, because as soon as she rules on something, she will be appealed and likely removed.

  32. There is something seriously wrong with this country if this clearly corrupt Judge isn’t shit canned + is welcome to the supreme court.

  33. I’ve never understood how it isn’t a huge conflict of interest for her to be presiding over a case where the defendant is the man who appointed her to her job. Why couldn’t they pick randomly from every non-Trump appointed judge in the district?

  34. Yeah, we noticed. The question is, how in the hell do they get rid of her?

  35. I’m not a journalist and I could have easly said the same thing the day she was very suspiciously appointed to this case – after all the fuckery she did leading up to it.

    Howabout journalists uncover some actual proof (promises of money, power, etc) that could be used to kick her out?

Leave a Reply