A federal judge on Monday barred the Justice Department from sharing former special counsel Jack Smith’s final report on the classified documents case against Donald Trump with members of Congress.
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, found there was no urgent need for the Justice Department to share the report with the chair and ranking members of the House and Senate judiciary committees while an appeal involving Trump’s co-defendants in the case is still pending.
Then-U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland said earlier this month he would not make the report public until the appeals involving Trump co-defendants Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira were decided, but planned to share it with the committee heads for a private review “upon your request and agreement not to release any information” about the report publicly.
In her ruling, Cannon said there had not been such a request, and suggested that the members of Congress could not be trusted not to share the contents of the report publicly.
“Given the very strong public interest in this criminal proceeding and the absence of any enforceable limits on the proposed disclosure, there is certainly a reasonable likelihood that review by members of Congress as proposed will result in public dissemination of all or part of Volume II,” she wrote.
The first part of Smith’s report, which detailed his investigation into Trump’s efforts to stay in power following the 2020 election, was released earlier this month and contained mostly information from public court filings in the case.
Cannon said the volume on the classified documents case is different. In addition to the presence of co-defendants — whom Trump did not have in the election interference case — the report contains “detailed and voluminous” information outlining the case against Trump, much of which “has not been made public in court filings,” the judge wrote.
Cannon also blasted the Justice Department argument that Garland had “limited time” and wanted “to comply with the historical practice of all Special Counsel” by turning over the final report to Congress.
“These statements do not reflect well on the Department,” she wrote. “There is no ‘historical practice’ of providing Special Counsel reports to Congress, even on a limited basis, pending conclusion of criminal proceedings. In fact, there is not one instance of this happening until now.”
The judge also took aim at the Justice Department’s position that the members of Congress need to see the report now for “possible legislative reforms regarding the use of special counsels,” writing, “There is no indication of pending legislative activity that could be aided by the proposed disclosure of Volume II to the specified members of Congress.”
“Prosecutors play a special role in our criminal justice system and are entrusted and expected to do justice,” the judge concluded. “The Department of Justice’s position on Defendants’ Emergency Motion as to Volume II has not been faithful to that obligation.”
The Justice Department declined comment on the ruling.
Trump, Nauta and De Oliveira had been charged with allegedly taking part in a scheme to help Trump retain highly classified documents that improperly remained in his possession after he left the White House in 2021 and with obstructing the ensuing investigation.
Cannon dismissed the criminal case last year, finding that Smith’s appointment was unlawful. Prosecutors appealed the ruling, but dropped their appeal of Trump’s case following his election win in November, citing a Justice Department legal memo that holds that the department can’t prosecute a sitting president.
Garland and Smith both resigned earlier this month.
