As a non lawyer (and Brit to boot, so the worst kind :)) my TL;DR is that
Judge Cannon has thrown out the documents case because of a rather idiosyncratic reading of something somewhere that says "special counsel
is baaaaddd". And because of her position as a federal judge this is now
the default law on the matter unless and until it is appealed to SCOTUS ?

How many cases where a special counsel was appointed and the defendant
found guilty can now be quashed ?

Most critically, how much popcorn will I need ?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

"Jethro_uk" wrote in message news:v7jeno$4teu$3@dont-email.me...

As a non lawyer (and Brit to boot, so the worst kind :)) my TL;DR is that >Judge Cannon has thrown out the documents case because of a rather >idiosyncratic reading of something somewhere that says "special counsel
is baaaaddd". And because of her position as a federal judge this is now
the default law on the matter unless and until it is appealed to SCOTUS ?

How many cases where a special counsel was appointed and the defendant
found guilty can now be quashed ?

Most critically, how much popcorn will I need ?

Cannon's ruling only applies to the documents case, though it's obvious
Smith will appeal the ruling and also, perhaps, try to get Cannon removed
from the case. The ruling does not apply to other special counsel cases,
and it does not even apply to Smith's election interference case against
Trump, though it is likely Trump will now appeal that case. Clearly both
cases will head to appeals courts and are unlikely to be settled before the election. If Trump wins the election, it is assumed he will direct his attorney general to dismiss both cases.

--

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In misc.legal.moderated, on Sun, 21 Jul 2024 17:34:19 -0700 (PDT),
Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

As a non lawyer (and Brit to boot, so the worst kind :)) my TL;DR is that >Judge Cannon has thrown out the documents case because of a rather >idiosyncratic reading of something somewhere that says "special counsel
is baaaaddd". And because of her position as a federal judge this is now
the default law on the matter unless and until it is appealed to SCOTUS ?

How many cases where a special counsel was appointed and the defendant
found guilty can now be quashed ?

None, iiuc.

AIUI (see sig.) trial court judges do not make precedent, they are
obliged to follow it. But if she really had a good argument, when her
deicsion is appealed, as it will be, if the circuit** court affirmed her position, that would be a precedent, at least in that circuit.

In this case, she probably doesnt' have a good argument, but it's
another way for her to waste more time. She has surely succeeded in
keeping trump from being tried for the crimes he committed in Florda
before the election, so Repubicans can vote while fantasizing that he
isn't guilty. I wonder when her chilren will figure out what she's
done and how they will react.

** Ah, this comes from England so you probably already know this stuff: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circuit_court

Most critically, how much popcorn will I need ?

It depends on whether you use butter or golden flavoring.

--
I think you can tell, but just to be sure:
I am not a lawyer.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

As a non lawyer (and Brit to boot, so the worst kind :)) my TL;DR is
that Judge Cannon has thrown out the documents case because of a
rather idiosyncratic reading of something somewhere that says "special counsel is baaaaddd". And because of her position as a federal judge
this is now the default law on the matter unless and until it is
appealed to SCOTUS ?

No, it's only the rule in her court in this one case. No other court is required to go along with it. If it gets appealed, the ruling of the
Court of Appeals will be binding on the entire 11th Circuit, where
Florida is located. There are 13 appellate circuits. When there are disagreements between the circuits, the Supreme Court may (but is not
required to) step in.

How many cases where a special counsel was appointed and the defendant
found guilty can now be quashed ?

At the moment, none.

Most critically, how much popcorn will I need ?

My guess is, not very much. But one never knows what this particular
Supreme Court will do. They seem to have no respect for precedent, or
even the words of statutes. So you could need a lot.

--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

micky <misc07@fmguy.com> wrote:

AIUI (see sig.) trial court judges do not make precedent, they are
obliged to follow it.

Actually in the federal court system, many trial court opinions are
publishes. If they deal with a unique situation, they may be cited by
other courts as precedent. They are not binding, of course, but they can
be influential.

--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)