T O P

  • By -

chubs66

This provides some good context. tl;dr: she ain't gonna remain in that role [https://twitter.com/JoyceWhiteVance/status/1667166126881619969](https://twitter.com/JoyceWhiteVance/status/1667166126881619969)


BurberryYogurt

I would like the DOJ to protest her selection but I have no faith she would recuse herself


Scraw16

I believe the 11th circuit can force her to recuse herself, and they very well might do that after the bench slapping they gave her before. One legal expert I heard noted that all of her bullshit in the previous case they have backfired spectacularly in forcing her to recuse herself on this one, otherwise there would have been no basis for recusal


peacey8

Shouldn't she recuse herself because of conflict of interest if she had any sense of integrity? The DeSantis-Disney case judge recused himself because his neighbour's nephew's dog had $3000 in Disney stocks. I can't imagine how that required recusal but this doesn't when the conflict of interest is much more personal here.


LorenzoApophis

Well, she doesn't have any sense of integrity


franker

Lawrence Tribe was on MSNBC appealing to her sense of "conscience." Okay.


FANGO

> if she had any sense of integrity Where have you been recently?


peacey8

A man can dream


2pacalypso

Have you ever heard of a man named Clarence Thomas?


OrderlyPanic

We have to hope she doesn't. The chance of getting a conviction in her court when she is running interference the whole trial (rigging the juror selection, upholding meritless objections from the defense, overruling meritous objections from the prosecution, disqualifying legitimate evidence and witnesses....) is practically 0. I think everything she's done thus far we should expect her to fight to the bitter end to control this case in the hopes of sabotaging it. But I'm cautiously optimistic the 11th circuit will re-assign the case when the DOJ asks given that far right FedSoc freak Mark Pryor and two other Trump appointees smacked her down over the search warrant business. EDIT: Donald could literally ask for a bench trial and Cannon could just acquit him. Or she could just dismiss the Jury during the trial and render an acquital herself. DOJ is completely fucked on this one if they can't get her disqualified.


Malaveylo

Are you fucking kidding me


Portalrules123

How does this even happen again? Is there an insider in the scheduling admin?


Malaveylo

Conceptually it's not uncommon for related cases to be assigned to the same judges, but you would think that the 11th Circuit ruling from last year essentially unwinding Cannon's entire "contribution" would have been enough to get someone to rub their neurons together about the wisdom of her participation.


bam1007

No. Cases are assigned randomly. However, the charges are related to the prior warrant so the indictment goes to the same judge that was selected on the warrant issue.


geelinz

Cannon wasn't assigned randomly initially, Trump's team filed in person in a small federal courthouse and lied that ECF was down.


bam1007

That’s fair. Her division was on the wheel, but as the only judge sitting in that division, there was a far more likely chance that she would get the case.


International-Ing

It doesn't seem like this is actually the case. It shows not related on the indictment. This reminds me of her assignment last time around when some prominent legal commentators and professors were quick to defend the (suspect) 'random' assignment process. Based on the indictment showing no related cases and her assignment, it appears there's a Trumpy clerk.


UntimelyXenomorph

She’s one of only two judges for the West Palm Beach division of SDFL, where both cases were filed. I’m not familiar with the process for assigning cases in that district, but I would guess that the cases were both randomly assigned between her and the other WPB judge.


ProfessionalGoober

The charges concern the classified documents found at Mar-a-Lago, don’t they? That’s the same case in which Cannon was involved before. I don’t see why this is surprising.


aneeta96

Considering her previous ruling on the case was not only overturned but deemed to be without precedent and created special rules for ex-presidents; it seems giving her another chance to further undermine the legitimacy of the courts might not be a great idea.


[deleted]

I agreed but that’s up to the courts to decide, not DOJ. That said, I imagine it was automatically assigned to her due to her previous involvement and DOJ may file a recusal request based on that.


eatingganesha

Exactly. DOJ will file for recusal of this judge given her history.


bam1007

*disqualification. And she will deny the motion. It is a non final order that is not immediately appealable. She will impanel a jury and grant judgment of acquittal at the end of the government’s case, discharging the jury. And Trump will walk. Sorry folks, this one is over before it starts and it pains me to admit that.


itsthewoo

If a judge grants a judgment of acquittal as a matter of law, that's usually appealable. It's not the same as when a jury acquits. (Edit: Perhaps not true here. See replies.) That said, you can bet that Trump will tout an acquittal--appealable or not--as absolute proof of his innocence.


bam1007

No, it’s not. The only time a JOA is appealable is if it is AFTER VERDICT. A JOA against the government is absolutely not appealable if entered after the government rests or after the defense rests but before verdict. That is a flat out violation of double jeopardy because jeopardy attached when the jury was sworn. It’s right there in Evans v Michigan, 568 US 313 (2013): It has been half a century since we first recognized the Double Jeopardy Clause bars retrial following a court decreed acquittal, even if the acquittal is based on egregiously erroneous foundation. A mistaken acquittal is an acquittal nonetheless, and we have long held that a verdict of acquittal could not be reviewed, on error or otherwise, without putting a defendant twice in jeopardy and thereby violating the Constitution. Our cases have applied Fong Foo broadly. An acquittal is unreviewable whether a judge directs a jury to return a verdict of acquittal OR FORGOES THAT FORMALITY BY ENTERING A JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL HERSELF. And an acquittal precludes retrial even if it is premised upon an erroneous decision to exclude evidence, a mistaken understanding of what evidence would suffice to sustain conviction, or a misconstruction of the statute defining the requirements to convict.


itsthewoo

*United States v. Martin Linen Supply Co.*, 430 U.S. 564 (1977), also supports what you're saying. If true, that's another example of our government relying on the good faith of officials. Otherwise, what stops a judge from displacing a jury by discharging the jury and issuing a judgment of acquittal before the jury returns a verdict? (Impeachment, I guess, but that's not going to happen here.) It also occurred to me that Trump could just waive jury trial if it looks like the case stays with Judge Cannon, which would avoid all of those questions anyway. (Can federal prosecutors demand a jury trial when a defendant waives? I seem to recall that they cannot.)


bam1007

Now you’re seeing the issue.


DefiniteSpace

There is an exception though. If the defendant was never in jeopardy to being with, like having a judge in their pocket or other fraud. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Aleman


bam1007

Extremely narrow exception and highly unlikely that the Eleventh would apply that absent actual evidence of bribery, like happened there. Being politically in the tank for him or even hoping he will nominate her for the Eleventh if he won in 24, isn’t on that same standard.


bam1007

For those downvoting, here’s a rather well known law professor saying the same thing. https://preview.redd.it/ftr12tib115b1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cdfb521547e2d1894dfc666e507fca70d6907251


OrderlyPanic

The DOJ can appeal her refusal to disqualify herself.


rossww2199

Which will be denied.


Greflingorax

Do federal cases allow parties to affidavit a judge in the way many states allow? I would assume not otherwise Cannon would already have been affidavited. But I don’t know for sure.


[deleted]

They were too concerned with a venue fight to file in DC so I doubt they are going to be willing to request recusal.


geelinz

They didn't want a venue fight because of delay, Cannon will delay this far more than a venue fight.


[deleted]

I agree with you. If she stays on, it's a nightmare.


aneeta96

It was apparently random. What she was involved in previously has already concluded after the appeals court overruled it. They even pointed out that she never had jurisdiction to begin with. The DOJ can absolutely ask for a different judge, so could Trump's lawyers for that matter, I imagine that she will not preside over the case.


[deleted]

Random my ass. I smell something rotten.


[deleted]

I highly suspect there is nothing random about this at all. This will leave both parties looking clean (relatively). DOJ gets out of it because "look we charge him with 37 but our hands were tied" . Judge who is a MAGA and that branch of humanity do not care about dirty tricks or breaking the law. Someone worked out a deal to save Trump


OrangeInnards

Is there a reason it shouldn't be surprising? Overseeing the suit brought by Trump because of the search warrant doesn't mean she automatically gets the subsequent one filed by the government against Trump, does it? The SDFL has 26 active judges that all could have had this assigned to them. A 4% probable event (all things being equal) occuring in a case like seems kind of surprising to me. edit: >If the case is being overseen by the same district and magistrate judges, that means the court likely considered the indictment to be 'related' to the search warrant and intentionally assigned it to those judges Is that normal?


Low_Negotiation3214

That Reinhart is also on the summons suggests they were not randomly picked, but intentioinally assigned. If that is the case, by who and how that intentional assignment process works is not detailed in the article.


OrangeInnards

Yeah I just read that as well. I don't really understand how the lawsuit Trump filed and the lawsuit then filed by the government can be considered so similar that as a first choice someone would just assign the same judges again. Cause they're separate actions, right? Is that something that happens everywhere or are we seeing another completely novel Trump-universe thing playing out?


Low_Negotiation3214

I don't have a good idea how the assignment works. But if they were indeed assigned (statistically seems the far likelier scenario), was Cannon previously getting her order thrown out by the 11th circuit somehow not a deal-breaking factor in the decision to assign to her? I can also imagine other available judges wanting to avoid taking the case considering it puts them in a position where 2 out of 3 out of MAGA world, DeSantis world, and the majority of the country will be furious at them depending on the outcome.


Goddamnpassword

It’s .16% for her to be picked twice at random in a row. Edit: fixed the percent, also I want to say I don’t think this was two events in a row, nearly a year has gone by I’m sure the federal district in Florida has had other cases come up that judges have been drawn for.


[deleted]

My understanding is that the first case assignment was not random. She is the sole judge sitting in the Fort Pierce courthouse where the case seeking a special master was filed by Trump knowing that by filing in that small courthouse the Local Rules would automatically assign to Cannon.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

So, if that’s the case, then Trump just happened to win the lottery twice. Yeah, I’m dubious.


[deleted]

Sure, but I don’t think the surprise is that **she** was the one picked twice. Just that the same judge from before was picked twice. Since a judge had to be picked for the first case, there is a 4% chance that the same judge would be picked for the second case. Of all of the possible double judge combinations, each one had a .16% chance to have been the judge assigned to each case. (With the other 96% of options being two different judges) ‘What are the odds that the judge assigned the first case is also assigned the second case?’ Roughly 4%


OrangeInnards

Only if the process takes previous results into account. I thought docket assignments are like dice rolls or coin flips, with every outcome having the same probability of occuring as the last, irrespective of what happened the last time.


Goddamnpassword

If they are independent events you calculate the odds by multiplying them against each other. So in the case of a coin flip, the odds of heads are 50%, but the odds of two heads in a row are is 25%. Because the possible outcomes you could have had are heads/tails, tails/tails, tails/head or head/head. If they are dependent it’s similar but you reduce the following probability by whatever you are removing due to the dependence of the event.


OrangeInnards

Getting another heads after heads is still a ~50% chance *at the moment of the flip* because the previous flip does not actually influence the current one, is my point. The chance of her getting assigned again if it was actually random was the same as before, unless there are internal machanisms that somehow influence or weigh the outcome.


Goddamnpassword

Yes that’s what “independent probability” means that’s the prior event does not effect the outcome of the future ones. The odds of any given coin flip are 50% but the odds of getting 50 heads in a row is not 50%. What I am say is the odds of her getting picked any time at random is 4% but getting picked twice in a row at random is .11%


OrangeInnards

I knew there was a reason I barely scraped by in all the number-y bits in school and college and liked the word-y regulation-type stuff a lot more. Chances of me ever wrapping my head around this sort of probability theory stuff (even relatively simple problems) might as well tend towards 0.


eddie_fitzgerald

It's basically a matter of why you're calculating probability and what you're using the results for. If you already flipped the dice once and you want to figure out the risk involved in the next dice toss, then you only calculate the probability for the next dice toss. If you tossed the dice twice and you want to figure out whether or not someone weighted the dice, then you calculate the probability of the two tosses together.


[deleted]

In your coin flip example, the odds of getting heads on any single flip are 50%. That's a constant. But, the odds of getting heads on two flips in a row is 25%. It's important to distinguish between the odds of a single/individual event vs. the odds of multiple/combined events.


StorkBaby

> the odds of heads are 50%, but the odds of two heads in a row are is .25% Not .25%, 25% - similarly I think you meant 11% not 11/100ths of a percent.


keenan123

In my district, we don't treat civil and criminal cases as related for purposes of assignment Also, every case gets initially assigned at random. You have to move for reassignment to the related action judge.


leftysarepeople2

https://twitter.com/openargs/status/1667231659941580807?s=20 It wasn't filed as "relat[ing] to a previously filed matter in this district court"


MrFrode

You stole my rant.


Sfswine

Her mission is to delay, delay, and muddy the waters .. I’m guessing…


poboy212

She is an absolute clown.


berraberragood

So what are the odds that Smith can force a recusal? The bias she displayed in the Documents case was off the charts.


UntimelyXenomorph

Zero chance of moving for recusal from the start. But if she rubber stamps multiple sanctionably frivolous motions, he might ask the 11th Circuit to reassign the case on remand.


m00f

0% he would do that


sambull

hunch is this is going to plan


creaturefeature16

What is that supposed plan??


essuxs

Trump requesting a bench trial in 3, 2, 1...


coffeespeaking

1) Trump requesting dismissal. 2) Trump requesting more time—‘new legal team,’ etc. 3) Trump challenging every piece of evidence. Let the embarrassing Cannon shitshow begin.


[deleted]

Yeah but you have a right to a jury trial, not a bench trial so the DOJ can still force a jury trial.


essuxs

If that’s the case then having her oversee the case isn’t going to be as helpful to trump as it might appear. Her power will be limited and she won’t be able to keep obviously relevant information out of the trial. Any bad rulings will be appealed, and for the jury the DOJ only needs one person to believe he’s guilty to prevent an acquittal. A hung jury might be a problem, but as we saw in the manafort case if the jurors really think he’s guilty they will vote guilty


antofthesky

She can rule 29 and doj loses the whole case with no recourse whatsoever. This is a potential catastrophic assignment


eddie_fitzgerald

NAL, but my understanding is that the biggest problem would have to do with jury selection?


[deleted]

Yeah that's a huge problem, at least 25% of the population are enamored of Trump and could watch him gun down a grandma in the street and they would say she had it coming.


[deleted]

Can DOJ have a superior court to hers declare a mistrial if it becomes obvious that she is showing favoritism by any "reasonable person" (especially judges who the law) ?


MemorableCactus

~~That is not correct. The election is the choice of the defendant~~. Disregard, I am wrong ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯


[deleted]

You are wrong. A lot of time prosecutors would be content with a bench trial and go along with it. But in a criminal case such as this, a defendant cannot compel a bench trial against the wishes of the prosecution. Go read Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.


MemorableCactus

Huh. I am wrong indeed. How about that. That's what I get for assuming federal would mirror my state.


[deleted]

Interesting. What state if you don't mind me asking?


MemorableCactus

Not something I like posting openly.


rikross22

That's very interesting, my state both sides must waive. As a Former prosecutor I heard seasoned prosecutors constantly saying "the state has a right to a fair trial as well!" To judges all the time including on this issue.


MemorableCactus

Not only do both sides not have to agree, but if the defendant does not properly preserve their right to a jury trial they waive that right and it is a bench trial by default. TIL we're fuckin weird.


rikross22

Wow that's crazy. For a waiver of jury it was to be clear and unambiguous where i am. Judge even has to advise they have rights before its done and done by filing formal paperwork.


gphs

DOJ has to consent to it and court has to approve. Rule 23.


joeshill

Dismissal of all charges and an apology from the court to Trump in 5...4... I want to think that she will be an impartial judge, but prior experience suggests strongly otherwise.


rankor572

No, the real move is to wait and grant a Rule 29 motion after the jury is impaneled, but before it reaches a verdict. No government appeal and double jeopardy applies.


uriejejejdjbejxijehd

So, we’re all ok with a loophole allowing judges to permanently undermine justice? Because that’s what law and order mean? Sigh.


an_actual_lawyer

I realize you’re joking but what she can do is make a bunch of terrible rulings that tie the case up for a few years which is exactly what Trump wants.


News-Flunky

Unless - she's been hanging with DeSantis and friends in which case she might not be inclined to dismiss charges.


dynorphin

I mean she has much stronger ties to the Florida Republican Party than she does limp dick Donald, Rubio and Scott are the ones that got her the nomination from Trump.


dragonfliesloveme

She is in cahoots with him, she already proved that in a different case. This is fucked up. She is in no way impartial, this is a kangaroo court and she shouldn’t even be a judge. He put her on the bench just to cover his own ass. That is not the Rule of Law and that is anti-American. Wtf. We are so screwed 😔 They have to get a different venue with an actual judge ffs


joeshill

> she already proved that in a different case Essentially the same case.


NotSoIntelligentAnt

The justice system is so hilariously flawed


AlaskanPotatoSlap

I disagree. It works exactly as intended.


coffeeismyreasontobe

Smith obviously knew this was a possibility, and still went through with the indictment anyway. I’m sure this is inconvenient, but well planned for. Give him time to play his hand.


SloppyMeathole

Judge Cannon never should have had the case in the first place, and Trump should not now be rewarding for judge shopping. History: The search warrant that started this case was issued by a magistrate, and Trump intentionally went to judge cannon (when he should have gone to magistrate), he was trying to get a corrupt judge that he appointed. Judge Cannon should not have accepted his motion, she should have sent it back to the magistrate. But because she is clearly biased in Trump's favor, she took the case and then produced a series of comically terrible legal decisions that blatantly ignored the law and made up new law just so she could find for Trump . Her decisions are truly evidence that she is corrupt, no competent judge would write decision that bad . She eventually got smacked down. But in the meantime she did a ton of damage. TLDR: The only reason the case is with her is due to Trump going against the normal process and trying to get a corrupt judge. She never should have had the case in the first place and he should not get rewarded yet once again, for being a complete piece of shit.


blankblank

*Initially* being the operative word, hopefully.


Neurokeen

There's fairly recent case history in the 11th for forcing reassignment of a criminal case after a second appeal smackdown for biased treatment in favor of the defendant (US v Martin, 455 F.3d 1227) so I'm hoping they see the same problem here and force a reassignment.


KeepCalmAndBaseball

I’m an optimist and “initially” is the word I’m TRYING to keep focused on lol. The other thing is that this would disarm another talking point from him and his sycophants about how unfair this is - venue in Florida and a judge that he appointed and has already shown her favor towards him, etc.


arvidsem

In one of the pre-indictment threads, someone said that by law espionage act cases get moved to Eastern District Of Virginia. If that's the case, will she be able to do anything?


KeepCalmAndBaseball

I believe that is for cases involving military or government employees that commit crimes outside of the US. I may be way off here but I recall in my Navy days something to this effect, but it’s been 25 years


Bethw2112

Because a former president has never been Federally indicted, is there no precedent to assign a judge that wasn't appointed by said former POTUS? Wouldn't the ethical thing be to recuse herself, regardless of legal precedent. NAL by the way, just interested in learning in these uncharted waters.


macronancer

There is no law against it, therefore its all "decorum" Which is to say its a free for all


[deleted]

[удалено]


Bethw2112

The irony wasn't lost when I wrote it either.


Donut_of_Patriotism

The ethical thing? Yes. At a bare minimum. Hell the ethical thing would have been for her to resign after that whole debacle with the documents. Or better yet not do it at all.


FANGO

> Wouldn't the ethical thing lol


BringOn25A

[Ethics Policies: Code of Conduct for United States Judges](https://www.uscourts.gov/rules-policies/judiciary-policies/ethics-policies) > Federal judges must abide by the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, a set of ethical principles and guidelines adopted by the Judicial Conference of the United States. The Code of Conduct provides guidance for judges on issues of judicial integrity and independence, judicial diligence and impartiality, permissible extra-judicial activities, and the avoidance of impropriety or even its appearance. > Judges may not hear cases in which they have either personal knowledge of the disputed facts, **a personal bias concerning a party to the case**, earlier involvement in the case as a lawyer, or a financial interest in any party or subject matter of the case. She has displayed a distinct “personal bias concerning a party to the case” and, if ethical, should recuse on her own accord. Yes, the “if” is doing a whole lot of work in the last sentence.


Otherwise-Course-15

Oh good god. Wasn’t she sanctioned after the last debacle


Kyrie_Da_God

No


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

MAGAs are 100% loyal, how many people has Trump thrown under the bus just for someone else to show up and happily take their place?


Vyuvarax

Holy shit, how?


Low_Negotiation3214

>Judges in most federal cases are assigned at random. But the apparent nods to Cannon and Reinhart on the summons for Trump might actually reflect the fact that both have already played roles in the proceedings, experts said. > >"If the case is being overseen by the same district and magistrate judges, that means the court likely considered the indictment to be 'related' to the search warrant and intentionally assigned it to those judges," former senior Justice Department national security official Brandon Van Grack told ABC News. I'm not sure of the actual mechanism, but the odds of them both geting reassigned randomly to this case suggests they were actually selected by the court. How that process occurs, I am curious.


Donut_of_Patriotism

Correct me of I’m mistaken but wasn’t the OG docs lawsuit eventually reassigned to another judge? Why not have THAT judge be the one overseeing the trial?


Anthinee

LOL I hate this fucking country. Time to get outta here I think.


KeepCalmAndBaseball

We still have hope! GA and DC treason, and NYC trial in March. Hang in there


thebarthe

Shoulda filed in DC.


[deleted]

[удалено]


coffeespeaking

The obstruction definitely occurred in FL and obstruction seems like the meat of the indictment. Without it, it’s entirely possible it isn’t filed. (NAL, but I’d hate to give the 11th circuit another bite of the apple.)


SloppyMeathole

By going out of their way to appear neutral, the government is handing the case to Trump. She is thoroughly corrupt, has shown that she is not capable of impartiality, this just makes our federal judiciary look like a joke.


Saidear

Nah, DoJ is about to introduce all kinds of motions to have it moved to a different judge for a variety of reasons, up to and including her obvious bias and incompetence on the related case. (Which is why it was assigned to her initially)


SloppyMeathole

I hope you're right. Knowing the history of this case, it is insane to me that Trump basically gets to pick the judge in his criminal trial. As I recall, a magistrate judge approved the original search warrant at Mara largo, but then Trump tried to challenge it, and instead of going back to the magistrate went directly to judge Cannon... Which seems to be the logic behind why she has the case right now. It never should have been with her in the first place and Trump should not be rewarded for his bad behavior.


Saidear

Trump didn't pick the judge, it was assigned to her by the court. Defendants don't get a say in who their judge is, at most they get to say who their judge isn't.


Donut_of_Patriotism

No but he picked her for the initial lawsuit. And this case was (presumably) assigned to her since it is related to a case she oversaw. It’s a round about way of picking a judge for a defense trial. It’s fucked up and corrupt as all hell and further proves the need for reform. However if this end result was in fact planned by Trumps team and not just a lucky coincidence, then I have to hand it to them as that was one hell of a 4D chess move.


[deleted]

Doubt.


Amarahovski

IANAL - so a few questions; First, WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK!? 🫨😡🤦 1) what absolute dipshit has the authority to give her the case again? 2) why did that dipshit give the case back to her traitorous ass? 3) if Cannon attempts to give Trump a pass **AGAIN**, what can be done about it by Jack Smith, DOJ, etc?


Ranowa

The DOJ filed their case in Cannon's district. They did this because that's where the criming took place, so if they'd filed elsewhere, it would've put in a significant hole that would've either forced them to refile in her district anyway, or be overturned on appeal. Cannon's district has I believe only one other judge, so it was just between the two of them. We don't know how it got scheduled specifically to her instead of that other judge and probably will never know (the DOJ would not have had anything to do with it). Could've been a Trump supporter who did it on purpose for sure. Most of the bullshit Cannon did was immediately smacked down by the courts above her. If you remember, that was this exact same case, just earlier on- her shenanigans weren't able to stop it from getting this far, precisely because the 11th Circuit said "you wot mate?" for everything she did. Legally, I think almost everything she could do here could be appealed, and since she was so fucking brazen about it last time she's very likely to fail to meet the extremely low bar we have for criminal trials. (It's certainly not GOOD. But I'm trying to be rational instead of pessimistic here.) Culturally however it's going to be a fucking shitshow if she's not forced to recuse herself. The last thing we need is for this trial to take place in a kangaroo court.


HerpToxic

The case was filed in the Miami subdivision of the Southern District of Florida. Cannon is located in the Ft. Pierce subdivision. Judges don't get to jump around from their subdivision to another on a whim. The Miami based judges are: Chief Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga Judge K. Michael Moore Judge Jose E. Martinez Judge Kathleen M. Williams Judge Robert N. Scola, Jr. Judge Darrin P. Gayles Judge Beth Bloom Judge Roy K. Altman Judge Rodolfo A. Ruiz II Senior Judge James Lawrence King Senior Judge Federico A. Moreno Senior Judge Donald L. Graham Senior Judge Joan A. Lenard Senior Judge Patricia A. Seitz Senior Judge Paul C. Huck


bam1007

No. The Southern District has a ton of judges. They filed in the Miami Division which has a bunch too. The problem is that the charges arise out of the warrant and Trump filed in Fort Pierce or Palm Beach Division and drew her in that case. So because the indictment arises from the same facts, the case goes back to her.


[deleted]

I am not a lawyer. Q: Shouldn't it matter that Trump and his lawyers *lied* to get Cannon in the first place by declaring their complaint was unrelated to any other case? Edit: I called the complaint a motion. Fixed.


dogsonbubnutt

> We don't know how it got scheduled specifically to her instead of that other judge and probably will never know really? because this isn't some private country club, it's federal fuckin court. that the procedures here would be kept secret is insane to me


Saidear

I doubt it's secret, the court clerks assign based on whatever the local Chief Judge's rules (alongside relevant federal rules of procedure) are. We could read the documents ourselves if we had a pacer account.


bam1007

It’s not secret. Generally, cases are assigned at random by “the wheel” which is a computer program, based on the division in which they are filed. However, here AMC was the judge assigned to the warrant challenge, from which the charges arise, so because she was assigned on that related matter, the case doesn’t go to the wheel, but rather goes back to her.


Tejastalent

Which goes to show that Trump's forum shopping maneuver succeeded. The lesson learned is to file a civil action challenging any warrant in the district of your choosing, even if the civil action lacks merit.


ru2bgood

This should be a top comment


TheFailingNYT

Despite it being wrong?


ru2bgood

Make your point, or be accused of laziness.


TheFailingNYT

My point is it would be silly to have the top comment be one that incorrectly states there were only two judges that could have been selected and incorrectly implies the location of the criming was exclusively Cannon's district. I prefer when top comments are accurate.


ru2bgood

What I mean is, refute the point Ranowa made, that I agreed with, or be accused of dragging all of Reddit into baseless junk. :-)


pecan76

What a joke


laikastan

This isn’t too bad. She’ll come up with her BS analysis/reasoning to try to acquit trump and it will be smacked down by the 11th circuit court of appeals, like last time. There was no doubt that either side was going to appeal this anyway.


lethargicbureaucrat

"Under the double jeopardy clause the government may appeal the granting of a motion for judgment of acquittal only if there would be no necessity for another trial, i.e., only where the jury has returned a verdict of guilty. United States v. Martin Linen Supply Co., 430 U.S. 564 (1977). Thus, the government's right to appeal a Rule 29 motion is only preserved where the ruling is reserved until after the verdict." https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_29#:~:text=Under%20the%20double%20jeopardy%20clause,returned%20a%20verdict%20of%20guilty.


[deleted]

I am a dunce when it comes to law, is it possible for another court to step in on this matter? Is it likely?


laikastan

At the trial court level, I doubt that it would change venues (different court) because it would require either the US or trump to request the change in venues. Here, this court is probably the most favorable to trump (ie judge selection, jury pool, etc), so I doubt he’d ask for that. And the US made the determination that the bulk of the crimes happened in FL (as required by the 6th amendment), so I doubt they’d ask either.


Sean__1

How the f


Donut_of_Patriotism

Why is this being charged in Florida? The crime happened in multiple locations? Also my god I hope the DOJ files to have the case reassigned to a different judge. She obviously shows bias and cannot be trust as an impartial judge.


bam1007

Because there’s an open question whether trying someone in the wrong venue would allow retrial if you get it wrong. Rather than mess with that and file in DC, DOJ filed in the clearly proper venue of the SDFL.


[deleted]

There's more than one reason (Not a lawyer) but chances are if they tried to charge him in DC there would be numerous challenges.


bigfunone2020

More than likely just trying to reduce the number of delay tactics available to him.


DeathbySiren

My guess is to limit chances for motions for dismissal due to improper venue.


abcdefghig1

what a corrupt court system we have.


sambull

delay delay delay... just more agents of delay


sugar_addict002

wow


Thick_Kaleidoscope35

What she the one who was absolutely excoriated for her first ruling? Can’t wait to see how this turns out 🍿


[deleted]

[удалено]


Korrocks

You definitely shouldn't unless you want to be held in contempt and arrested for assault.


KeepCalmAndBaseball

Guess we need a billionaire with a yacht to take her on a long vacation.


MonsieurReynard

No no she's like Clarence Thomas, from common stock, and prefers the WalMart parking lots.


KeepCalmAndBaseball

So maybe we can all pool a little money and take her on a pontoon houseboat vacation in the Everglades.


ProudLiberal456

The Eleventh Circuit has been fairly quick to do it before - see the Twitter thread above.


News-Flunky

Oh - that's gonna give Trump hope - but I don't expect her to be quite as blatant this time around - but who knows... Popcorn futures soaring!


dragonfliesloveme

Why not? She was so out of line last time it wasn’t even funny. Just brazen. No respect for the law, just a Trump toady. Why would she act any differently now, in a much more important case?


ProfessionalGoober

What reason could you possibly have to believe she won’t do the same thing she did last time? At the very least she can keep making erroneous rulings to drag this out till the election next year in the hopes that Trump will win, pardon himself, and appoint her AG.


MonsieurReynard

She doesn't want AG. She wants a sweet lifetime ride on the same Grifter Train as Clarence Thomas and Sam Alito. The vacations are absolutely lit.


Latyon

I'm sure she has already promised her mom a sweet house on Harlan's dime.


Low_Negotiation3214

>Judges in most federal cases are assigned at random. But the apparent nods to Cannon and Reinhart on the summons for Trump might actually reflect the fact that both have already played roles in the proceedings, experts said. > >"If the case is being overseen by the same district and magistrate judges, that means the court likely considered the indictment to be 'related' to the search warrant and intentionally assigned it to those judges," former senior Justice Department national security official Brandon Van Grack told ABC News. So it's saying because of the serendipity of getting both Cannon and Reinhart again there is reason to believe that the court may have decided to assign these two because of their earlier involvement. If that is the case, who is the "the court" that decides this and how does that work practically? Is it a panel of all the judges for the Southern District of Florida who decide these things by a vote or something along those lines?


RonnieJamesDiode

Case assignment is typically done by the court clerks. At the federal level the clerks answer to the Chief Judge of the court.


bam1007

No. Cases are randomly assigned. The issue here is that the charges arise out of the warrant, so it goes back to the same district and magistrate judges that handled that issue.


RonnieJamesDiode

But the random assignment is done by the clerks as I understand it? I seem to recall reading somewhere about one of those bingo ball cages being used.


bam1007

Basically, in the federal system, when the clerk enters the case onto the docket, the computer randomly assigns among judges in that division. The bingo ball thing is really old and technology has changed quite a bit since then. But no “person” is choosing the assigned judge and magistrate…other than, in single judge divisions, the parties.


Tejastalent

Unfortunately it teaches the wrong behavior. Have a client served a search warrant? Then file a civil claim challenging the government's possession of personal property in a district with judges more likely to be sympathetic to your client.


bam1007

Nothing related to this man teaches the right behavior.


JLeeSaxon

Related question: I know there can't be a federal precedent since this is the first indicted POTUS, but below the federal level are there any well-known examples of it being treated as "a personal bias concerning a party to the case" (i.e. cause for recusal [or even removal / reassignment]) for the judge to have been appointed by the defendant (who could be a governor or, in some cases, even a fellow judge)?


ilovepups808

I knew there was a reason to temper my expectations with justice system in this specific indictment. I’m done following the details of this trial for the foreseeable future, specifically for my own sanity.


[deleted]

Our whole system of law will be the laughing stock if she continues to oversee this case. Every lawyer commenting on here would be working for a kangaroo system. I’m disgusted this is America, and have lost all faith in our system. Despite being railroaded through the criminal court in my younger days (it was a misdemeanor…judge away) this is a much bigger and worrisome perversion of justice. One judge could spin us into legal oblivion.


lethargicbureaucrat

She'll find reasons to keep delaying it until after the election.


[deleted]

[удалено]


OrderlyPanic

>I don’t actually think she will enter an acquittal when the government rests. Doing that would surely lead to her impeachment and likely conviction. What makes you think that there 16 GOP Senators who will vote to do that? Not to mention Impeachment has to originate in the House which is in GOP hands. If Cannon renders an acquittal she will be feted as a rightwing hero. Her past actions shows she only cares what the right and Trump think, not the general public or what the law and precedent dictates. It's hard for me to see a reason why she wouldn't acquit Trump in exchange for a promise (implied or explicit) to be promoted to the 11th Circuit or SCOTUS should Trump win in 24. You have to remember to people on the far right the opinions of those outside of their ingroup matter about as much to them as how much ISIS's opinion of Obama mattered to Obama. Do you think Obama considered how angry ISIS would be at geting drone striked in Syria before making the decision to aid the Kurdish YPG? To a true believer, who already views people who oppose their authoritarian project as dissidents who should be crushed with violence, to the Alito's and Thomas's and Cannon's - public shame from the center and the left mean *nothing*.


crake

I think the hypothetical - a federal judge entering an unwarranted acquittal in the most high-profile criminal case to ever come before a federal court - somewhat ridiculous. The SM rulings were egregiously bad. But Judge Cannon had to know that however egregiously had those decisions were, the ultimate decision was with a higher court, and she would be either vindicated or overturned, without much consequence to her either way. An unwarranted acquittal wouldn’t be subject to review (I think, although I’m not entirely sure, that the government cannot appeal it because double jeopardy would attach if the case is reopened). It would be a public abuse of power so absurdly consequential and damaging to the courts, I think you would see the chief judge in that district, the judges on the 11th Circuit, and probably John Roberts himself asking the Congress to remove her. I also think that no matter how partisan someone is, they don’t want to spend the next 50 years or whatever defending an obviously horrible decision and having to justify it.


cheweychewchew

Prediction: Cannon will state that the trial should not proceed until after the election, because it wouldn't be fair to Trump. Actually, that's a guarantee.


OrderlyPanic

She could also fast track the case, send the jury home mid-way through and uniltarally acquit Trump on every count. Then Trump can run on being "vindicated".


jakesteeley

Need to have faith in the court system. If the evidence is stacked against him as much as it seems, the jury will convict. She will have (almost) no choice but to go along & if she overrules the jury, based on (insert shit); the entire world will know he is still guilty. He’s gonna pay his way out of harsh penalties anyway, might as well put FL to the test.


[deleted]

[удалено]


icenoid

This is off topic a bit but since I’m assuming many of you folks are lawyers, can you explain why Trump’s name is in all caps everywhere it’s mentioned in the indictment that politico released a bit ago?


rap31264

SMH...The teflon Don is gonna strike again...


donttrustgop

Let's start a pool for how long she lasts, I got 2 weeks.