A free speech institute has urged a Florida federal judge, Aileen M. Cannon, to release the unpublicized special counsel report concerning President Trump’s classified documents case, citing First Amendment rights. Cannon had previously blocked the Justice Department from publicizing the report during the Trump investigation. The report, authored by special counsel Jack Smith, remains confidential, while the first volume relating to Trump’s election interference was released in January. The Knight First Amendment Institute argued that the report should be public now that the case has ended, amidst ongoing legal efforts for its disclosure by other groups, including American Oversight and The New York Times.
A free speech organization urged a federal judge in Florida on Monday to disclose the special counsel report concerning the classified documents case against President Trump, contending that the public has a First Amendment right to access it.
The motion was submitted to Judge Aileen M. Cannon of the Southern District of Florida, who managed the case and later dismissed it, marking another attempt to publish the report authored by former special counsel, Jack Smith.
In the final days of the Biden administration, Judge Cannon intervened to prevent the Justice Department from sharing the report with anyone outside the department. As part of this intervention, she mandated the department to provide a copy of the report to her.
The report constitutes the second volume of a two-part document that Mr. Smith prepared after halting the federal criminal charges he initiated against Mr. Trump due to his 2024 election victory. The Justice Department has consistently maintained that sitting presidents enjoy temporary immunity from prosecution.
The first volume, which pertains to the case Mr. Smith pursued against Mr. Trump regarding his attempts to overturn the 2020 election results, was made public in January. However, the second volume, discussing Mr. Trump’s retention of classified documents after leaving office, remains undisclosed.
Judge Cannon’s decision to keep the report confidential was grounded in the premise that it would safeguard the rights of Mr. Trump’s two co-defendants, whose cases were not dismissed initially, should their trials proceed in the future.
As anticipated, the Trump-era Justice Department quickly petitioned the appeals court to dismiss the remaining aspects of the case, which the court did on Feb. 11. In light of this development, the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University requested that she lift her injunction, asserting that the legal basis for it has concluded.
In an intriguing turn, the Institute also requested that she file the report on the public docket, arguing that her order to have the government provide her a copy subjected it to the public’s constitutional right to view judicial records.
The motion stated, “The report is a judicial document inextricably intertwined with a proceeding that is itself subject to the constitutional access right.”
Judge Cannon gained notoriety for demonstrating unusual leniency towards Mr. Trump in her rulings throughout the investigation and the trial. However, even if she denies the request, the Knight First Amendment Institute could seek an appeals court ruling to release the document.
This motion represents the second attempt by an external organization to persuade Judge Cannon to reconsider her order maintaining the report’s confidentiality.
American Oversight has initiated a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit in the Federal District Court in Washington for the report, emphasizing the urgency due to the necessity for the public to be informed about what Mr. Smith documented about Kash Patel, whose nomination was then under consideration for the F.B.I. director position.
Mr. Smith’s team had interrogated Mr. Patel before a grand jury concerning his public assertion that Mr. Trump, while still in office, had declassified all the documents that accompanied him to his Florida residence, Mar-a-Lago, post-presidency. Nevertheless, the Senate confirmed Mr. Patel as F.B.I. director on Feb. 20.
Judge Cannon has indicated she will consider what action, if any, to take regarding her injunction next month. On Feb. 14, American Oversight requested that she promptly lift her order given the case’s resolution, but she declined to modify her schedule.
Additionally, The New York Times has filed a separate Freedom of Information Act lawsuit in the Southern District of New York to gain access to the report.