Former President Donald Trump is anticipated to be present in court this Thursday, where his legal team will seek to have his federal classified documents case dismissed. The hearing, set by U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon in Fort Pierce, Florida, will examine two motions put forth by Trump’s defense. These motions challenge the constitutionality of special counsel Jack Smith’s invocation of the Espionage Act and his application of the Presidential Records Act in the case against Trump.
Smith counters these dismissal attempts, suggesting they are indicative of Trump’s belief in his exemption from the law. According to prosecutors, Trump’s arguments are founded on several critical misunderstandings, all suggesting that he, as a former President, is not subject to the same legal and accountability standards as other citizens.
The case also involves Trump’s co-defendants, aide Walt Nauta and Mar-a-Lago property manager Carlos De Oliveira, who are both expected to attend the hearing. This legal proceeding follows closely on the heels of a Georgia judge’s decision to dismiss six counts in a comprehensive election interference case against Trump and 18 co-defendants, leaving Trump still facing 10 counts in Georgia.
At the heart of Thursday’s hearing is the Presidential Records Act, a law enacted post-Watergate scandal to prevent the potential destruction of records by outgoing presidents. Trump’s attorneys argue that this law allowed Trump to classify the documents found at his Mar-a-Lago estate as personal, thereby making their retention lawful. They further argue that the law does not allow for criminal charges and that Trump had ultimate authority over the handling of presidential records, contrary to the practices of the National Archives.
Special counsel Smith, however, maintains that the documents in question are undeniably presidential records and not personal ones, asserting that Trump’s retention of these documents was unauthorized. Additionally, Trump’s defense challenges the clarity of the Espionage Act’s provisions on retaining defense materials, labeling them as unconstitutionally vague for Trump’s situation. They cite the selective prosecution against Trump, contrasting it with the case of President Joe Biden’s retention of classified documents, for which Biden was not charged.
Prosecutors rebut this by stating the law’s clarity and Trump’s inherent understanding of the importance of safeguarding national security and military secrets, given his former role as commander-in-chief. Trump’s actions to delay and obstruct the investigation further demonstrate his legal violations, they argue.
The trial is currently slated to begin in mid-May, although a recent hearing entertained discussions on postponing it. While Smith’s team proposed a new date of July 8, Trump’s lawyers suggested delaying the trial until after the 2024 presidential election. Judge Cannon has yet to make any formal adjustments to the trial’s commencement date.
As Trump’s legal challenges mount, it remains uncertain whether the trial date will be addressed in Thursday’s hearing. Trump is also scheduled to stand trial in New York on March 25 on charges related to falsifying business records connected to a hush payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election, charges he denies.