Legal expert points to 'red flag' that could get Judge Cannon booted from Trump case

Special counsel Jack Smith "made a smart strategic play" by requesting a December trial date for Donald Trump in the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case, according to a legal expert.

The government has 70 days from the date of arraignment to try the former president under the Speedy Trial Act, which provides for periods of "excludable time" and other delays that often benefit the defendant, but Trump's lawyers will likely seek even further delays to possibly push the case past next year's presidential election, wrote former U.S. attorney Joyce Vance on her Civil Discourse page on Substack.

"It’s a bit of a double-edged sword for Trump," Vance wrote. "He could agree to the December date, which he won’t do, at least not without the intention of asking for a continuance as that date gets closer. If Trump objects to a December trial and asks for a date after the first of the year, the government will undoubtedly demand a ruling that he cannot use rallies, campaign events, and primary dates as an excuse for further delay. Since it would be entirely reasonable, under the government’s proposed schedule, to try the case in December, if Trump asks for additional leeway and the Court grants it, there is no reason it shouldn’t come with conditions that ensure the people get their right to a speedy trial."

Prosecutors have argued in court filings that the case is neither unusual or complex because it involves only two defendants and does not present any novel questions of fact or law, so there's little reason for Trump to argue that the trial should be delayed into late 2024 or beyond.

"Unless Trump can identify one, it would be a red flag if the judge gave Trump preferential treatment, in terms of continuing to delay proceedings while campaigning, that other defendants can’t receive," Vance wrote.

The government has moved quickly to turn over non-classified evidence to defense attorneys as part of the discovery process, so federal judge Aileen Cannon would only invite scrutiny by agreeing to delay the trial.

"There’s no legitimate reason for an extended delay before trial and certainly no reason to delay it until after the 2024 election, more than a year off," Vance wrote. "A ruling to that effect from Judge Cannon would likely provoke renewed concern about her ability to handle the case in a fair and unbiased way. Expect Trump to make the motion, but a decision by the judge to move the trial that far off would be unprecedented."