(Photo by Nicholas kamm for AFP)
Reacting to the stunning decision on Monday by Judge Aileen Cannon to summarily dismiss charges against Donald Trump for the theft of government documents, MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin expressed concern over the judge’s concluding remarks, suggesting they should raise alarms. During her appearance with host José Díaz-Balart, Díaz-Balart read the controversial closing of Cannon’s 93-page ruling. He then asked Rubin for her thoughts.
“You know, Jose, if you were just writing an opinion for lawyers where you say the case is dismissed, you stop,” Rubin began. “The way in which Judge Cannon structured her language at the end of the opinion suggests she’s writing for multiple audiences, and those audiences include our viewers and the general American public.”
For the reasons set forth above, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:1. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Superseding Indictment Based on Unlawful Appointment
and Funding of Special Counsel Jack Smith is GRANTED in accordance with this Order
[ECF No. 326].
2. The Superseding Indictment [ECF No. 85] is DISMISSED.
3. This Order is confined to this proceeding. The Court decides no other legal rights or claims.
4. This Order shall not affect or weaken any of the protections for classified information
imposed in this case or any protective orders pertaining to classified information.
5. The Clerk is directed to CLOSE this case. Any scheduled hearings are CANCELLED.
Any pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT, and any pending deadlines are
TERMINATED.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Pierce
Rubin explained, “She’s trying to make absolutely abundantly crystal clear what the ramifications of her decision are today, not just to people like me, but to our viewers watching at home and anybody else who has an interest or a stake in this proceeding.”
According to Rubin, Judge Cannon’s concluding remarks make it evident that the dismissal has broad and significant implications. “As you said, what dismissal means is that any other motions are moot, any other hearings are never happening — this is a final decision of this court,” she stated. Rubin also noted that, while the decision is final for the lower court, it can be appealed, which offers a potential path forward for those contesting the ruling.
The dismissal by Judge Cannon follows Trump’s charges related to hoarding government documents at his Mar-a-Lago resort. The decision has sparked widespread outrage and concern among legal analysts and the public. Critics argue that the dismissal undermines accountability and raises questions about the impartiality of the judicial process.
Rubin’s analysis underscores the broader implications of Judge Cannon’s ruling. By addressing multiple audiences, including the general public, Cannon’s decision appears to be crafted not just for legal professionals but for anyone following the case. This approach may be intended to clarify the ramifications and finality of the dismissal, emphasizing its impact on the judicial process and public perception.
The decision has prompted a wave of reactions, with many expressing fear that it could set a dangerous precedent. The potential appeal process now becomes a focal point for those seeking to challenge the ruling and uphold the charges against Trump. As the legal community and the public continue to react, the case remains a critical point of discussion in the ongoing discourse about justice and accountability in high-profile legal proceedings.
