Analysis | Jack Smith puts Judge Aileen Cannon on notice

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

76% : Even invoking the PRA in the instructions would be a gift to Trump.
45% : "The PRA's distinction between personal and presidential records has no bearing on whether a former President's possession of documents containing national defense information is authorized under the Espionage Act," Smith's filing says, "and the PRA should play no role in the jury instructions ..."Smith goes on to indicate that Cannon's request would effectively stack the deck against the prosecution.
41% : ""No other witness recalled Trump espousing this theory until after the Judicial Watch president conveyed it to him in February 2022," Smith says.Smith goes on to comply with Cannon's request for the proposed jury instructions to include discussion of the PRA.
39% : Those experts say the PRA has no bearing on the case, which instead involves the Espionage Act.
38% : It would effectively inject the idea that the classified documents Trump held onto might somehow be his personal records in a way that many experts say is nonsensical and would severely jeopardize the case.
37% : Smith says that before this point, a Trump employee who had spoken with Fitton about the idea "had never heard this theory from Trump.
35% : They want her to make her ruling already, take ownership of the moment if she thinks Trump is right on the law, and let DOJ take this to the 11th Circuit," Moss said.
34% : He not only argues that the PRA doesn't bear on the case, but he says that no key witness has any knowledge of Trump's designating the documents as personal records or believing his removal of them made them personal.
30% : And it urges her to act quickly on the matter to allow the prosecution to appeal before it's too late and compromises the trial.Were Cannon to make an erroneous ruling after the trial begins and if Trump were then acquitted, the government would not be able to appeal.
28% : "To the contrary, every witness who was asked this question had never heard such a thing," Smith says.Smith even suggests that this justification was effectively invented long after Trump took the documents -- by Trump ally and Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton, who Smith takes care to note is "not an attorney."

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.