A federal appeals court ruled Thursday that the report compiled by special counsel Jack Smith on his investigation into election subversion and the January 6, 2021 events can be made public, but with some important conditions still in place. A three-day hold, imposed by a lower court judge, could provide former President Donald Trump with an opportunity to seek intervention from the Supreme Court, keeping the fate of the report up in the air.
The legal battle surrounding the release of the report has been closely watched, with Trump and his former associates involved in multiple court battles to prevent its publication. This includes challenges to the release of parts of the report focusing on the 2020 election subversion. The 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals issued an unsigned order on Thursday, confirming that the report would not be released immediately. However, this decision could spark further legal maneuvers, possibly stretching the case even closer to Trump's inauguration on January 20, 2025.
While the order from the 11th Circuit prevents the immediate release of the report, it also opens the door for the Justice Department to request the lifting of the temporary hold imposed by US District Judge Aileen Cannon. Judge Cannon's order currently prevents the Department of Justice from sharing any information from the report with anyone outside the agency. The Justice Department now has an opportunity to ask the appeals court to lift that hold.
Trump's spokesperson, Steven Cheung, responded to the ruling by criticizing the decision. “Today’s decision by the 11th Circuit keeps Judge Cannon’s injunction in place and prevents any report from being issued. It is time for Joe Biden and Merrick Garland to do the right thing and put a final stop to the political weaponization of our Justice system,” Cheung said. On the other hand, a spokesperson for the special counsel declined to comment on the matter.
Jack Smith, the special counsel, submitted his final report to the attorney general earlier this week, as required by department regulations for special counsels. The report is divided into two volumes: one covering the election subversion investigation, and the other examining the classified documents case. This submission marked a significant milestone in Smith’s yearslong investigation, which included high-profile legal battles and complex issues of presidential power, public safety, and national security.
The two volumes of the report are expected to cover both of Smith’s investigations that led to charges being brought against Trump. Given the extensive nature of the investigations, it’s unlikely that the report will contain groundbreaking new facts. Nevertheless, it will serve as the final word from the special counsel on what was uncovered throughout the investigation.
Attorney General Merrick Garland had previously announced plans to release the portion of the report that deals with the January 6 events, once the legal hurdles were cleared. He decided, however, not to publicly release the section of the report related to the classified documents investigation. This decision was made to protect the potential criminal proceedings involving Trump’s co-defendants in that case, as reopening those proceedings could be an issue in the future.
However, Garland did allow for a select group of lawmakers to privately review the volume of the report relating to the classified documents investigation. Trump’s legal team, which had already been granted the opportunity to review a draft of the report, has strongly criticized the document. Trump himself called it, in his court filings, “nothing less than another attempted political hit job whose sole purpose is to disrupt the Presidential transition and undermine President Trump’s exercise of executive power.”
This report, which is currently the subject of intense debate, will be Smith's final statement on his two significant investigations. The election subversion investigation focuses on allegations that Trump, along with several unindicted co-conspirators, orchestrated a multi-step plan to undermine the peaceful transfer of power after the 2020 election. The culmination of that scheme was the violent January 6 attack on the US Capitol by a mob of Trump supporters, an event that left an indelible mark on American democracy.
Meanwhile, the classified documents investigation revolves around charges that Trump mishandled national defense information and obstructed the federal investigation into the location of classified documents that were improperly taken from the White House after his presidency. Trump, along with co-defendants Walta Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, faces serious legal consequences in connection to this case. Nauta and De Oliveira have pleaded not guilty, and the case against them was initially dismissed by Judge Cannon, although it could be revived if the appeals court rules in favor of reinstating the charges.
The ongoing legal struggle between Trump and the Justice Department over the authority of the special counsel and the legitimacy of Smith's report has added another layer of complexity to the issue. Trump's legal team has argued that a 2024 ruling by Judge Cannon, which declared Smith’s appointment unconstitutional, strips Smith of the authority to produce the report. This ruling, according to Trump’s attorneys, should prevent the report from being published or used in any way by Garland.
Despite these challenges, the Justice Department has made it clear that it does not intend to release the report before Friday, allowing time for further review by Garland and his team. The hold on the report's publication, however, is just one piece of a much larger puzzle that will likely continue to evolve in the coming weeks. With so much at stake, this legal battle may just be heating up.
While the primary focus remains on the current court fight, there are additional avenues through which the details of the report could eventually be revealed to the public. For instance, special counsel regulations permit the report—or certain information from it—to be shared with Congress. This could be a significant point of contention, as lawmakers push to gain access to the information contained within the report for the sake of transparency and oversight.
Additionally, public interest in the report could lead to lawsuits under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), similar to the legal battles that followed the release of special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation documents. These lawsuits often bring to light significant pieces of information and may result in the release of unredacted versions of the report, providing the public with a clearer understanding of what transpired behind closed doors.
Another potential route for information to surface is through litigation involving Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is overseeing Trump’s other criminal case related to the 2020 election. Should new revelations emerge, the courtroom drama could continue to unfold, adding further twists to the already complex legal landscape.
As the clock ticks down to Trump’s potential inauguration in January 2025, the court battles surrounding the special counsel’s report are far from over. The outcome of this ongoing legal conflict could have lasting implications for the future of Trump’s legal troubles, the legitimacy of the 2020 election, and the broader issue of executive power in the United States.
In sum, while the 11th Circuit’s recent ruling may have given a temporary victory to Trump and his legal team, the broader saga is far from complete. With the report’s potential for public release still hanging in the balance, legal experts, lawmakers, and the American public alike will be watching closely to see how the situation unfolds. Whether through the courts, Congress, or other avenues, the full truth about Trump’s actions related to the 2020 election and January 6 is likely to continue coming to light in the months ahead.
Login