Renowned special counsel Jack Smith has taken his leave from the Justice Department, a decision in line with expectations following his detailed investigative examination of President-elect Donald Trump. Smith’s professional departure was noted in a legal document made public over the weekend, marking an end to his service just a day prior. The timing of his resignation, mere days before Trump’s inauguration, was subsequent to his concluding two trials involving Trump, both of which were, unsurprisingly, unsuccessful and subsequently abandoned following Trump’s triumphant victory in the November elections.
The matter at hand is now related to a comprehensive two-volume report, an impressive effort by Smith and his team. The report includes the investigation of Trump’s attempts to contest the outcome of his 2020 election and an incident concerning a collection of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate. The Justice Department was previously projected to disclose the document during the final phase of the Biden administration.
However, in an unexpected move, the Trump-nominated judge overseeing the classified documents case favored a defense plea to postpone, at least for a while, the document’s release. Trump’s valet Walt Nauta and Mar-a-Lago property manager Carlos De Oliveira, who were co-defendants in this case, made a compelling argument that the report’s release could potentially be prejudiced against them – an argument backed by the Trump legal team.
The department responded sensibly, agreeing to withhold the so-called classified documents volume from the public eye while criminal proceedings involving Nauta and De Oliveira continue. U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon had previously dismissed the case in July. However, an appeal from the Smith team regarding the situation of the two co-defendants remains unresolved.
On a related note, the prosecutors expressed their intention to proceed with the release of the volume related to election interference. Their actions were asserting, filing an emergency motion on the preceding Friday, asking the Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to promptly annul the injunction from Cannon preventing the release of the report. Simultaneously, they asserted to Cannon that her order prohibiting the report’s release was beyond her jurisdiction.
Cannon responded by ordering the prosecutors to file an additional brief by Sunday. Meanwhile, the appeals court turned down an urgent defense plea to prevent the release of the election interference report. The report covered Trump’s activities leading up to January 6, 2021, before the Capitol riot, to dispute the results of the 2020 election.
However, the appeal court opted to sustain Cannon’s injunction restricting the issuance of any findings until three days post the verdict of the appeals court. In an emergency motion, the Justice Department confidently rebutted Cannon’s order calling it clearly erroneous.
In an assertive statement, the Justice Department validated their stand stating, ‘The Attorney General, confirmed by the Senate, is the headspring of the Department of Justice and possesses the authority to guide all officers and employees of the Department’. Thus, the ability to decide on the release of an investigative report prepared by subordinate officers is inherently within the Attorney General’s purview.
The protocols of the Justice Department mandate the production of reports by special counsels at the end of their assignments. It’s become a common, and almost expected, practice to make these documents available to the public, irrespective of the topic.
In line with this norm, William Barr, attorney general during Trump’s first term, made public a special counsel report scrutinizing Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and potential links to the Trump campaign. Merrick Garland, the attorney general under Biden, followed suit releasing special counsel reports, even those involving Biden’s management of classified information before his rise to the presidency.