Judge Aileen Cannon rejected Special Counsel Jack Smith’s request to conceal certain documents in the classified documents case against President Trump.
Smith’s legal team had petitioned Judge Cannon last month to keep these documents sealed, citing them as “highly sensitive classified information.”
However, Judge Cannon dismissed Smith’s request to maintain secrecy over the records.
“In light of the Special Counsel’s Response to Defendants Motion to Unseal 230, and mindful of the strong presumption in favor of public access to judicial documents, the Clerk is directed to unseal docket entries 223, 224, and 230,” Judge Cannon’s order reads.
JUST IN: Federal Judge DENIES Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Request to CONCEAL DOCUMENTS in Trump Classified Doc. Case..
— Chuck Callesto (@ChuckCallesto) December 4, 2023
Judge Aileen Cannon, presiding over former President Donald Trump’s trial concerning classified documents, has denied a request from special counsel Jack Smith… pic.twitter.com/quxUoeBpDy
From Newsweek (Excerpt):
Aileen Cannon, the judge presiding over former President Donald Trump’s classified documents case, on Monday ordered the unsealing of documents filed by Special Counsel Jack Smith, who had asked that they be kept under wraps because they could reveal his trial strategy.
On Monday, Cannon ordered the unsealing of documents filed by Smith in the case, making them public, adding that she was “mindful of the strong presumption in favor of public access to judicial documents.”
On November 22, Smith asked that the filing be kept under seal because it contained government plans to delete “highly sensitive classified information” from sharable discovery.
Cannon said that Smith had not provided “sufficient justification” for his filing because the motions did not “contain or otherwise reveal classified information.”
Additionally, a Friday court document revealed the response to the initial order of unsealing in which Smith’s team agreed to unseal the documents, as requested by the defense, though prosecutors insisted on some redactions.
“The defendants did not oppose the Government’s request, but reserved the right to challenge them later,” Smith wrote, adding that a full unsealing could disclose classified defense counsel information about how government’s CIPA motion.
“This is the same information that the Government proposed redacting. Because the Court rejected that position and ordered the Government to provide unredacted versions of the two docket entries to defense counsel, there is no justification for keeping them from the public.”
