Friday's ruling
So here is the actual key parts of her ruling.
1st motion
The Court does not authorize Defendant Trump’s proposed redactions to witness statements in Exhibit 9 to the Motion.
ii. The Court authorizes the limited redactions to the portions of sentences set forth in the Special Counsel’s chart on the basis of the stated Rule 6(e) rationale
2nd motion
Motion Exhibit 2: The Court does not authorize Defendant Trump’sproposed redactions to witness statements in Paragraph 28
The Court accepts the remainder of the parties’ proposed redactions as to Exhibit 2.2 The parties are directed to redact the name of a potential government witness
ii. Motion Exhibit 18: The Court authorizes the redactions of sentences identified in the Special Counsel’s submission relating to grand jury testimony of “Person 12."
iii. Opposition Exhibit 1: The Court does not authorize Defendant Trump’s proposed redactions to witness statements in Paragraph 28
iv. Opposition Exhibit 5: On the basis of the Special Counsel’s stated Rule 6(e) rationale, the Court directs fullsealing of Opposition Exhibit 5
She then mentions two Special Counsel Motions which are granted in part and denied in part based on previous rulings.
So for the most part this is a very favorable ruling for Jack Smith.
Backstory This goes back months. At least as early as January. They have been fighting over redactions to motions. Not even the motions themselves which are still undecided.
And Jack Smith made Cannon reverse a ruling on redactions. In a filing in February he said she made "a clear error" and applied the wrong legal standing. So Smith filed a "motion to reconser".... basically pointing out she would get overturned on appeal....and may even give him a cause to ask her to be removed.
She reversed her ruling in April. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/2960380/judge-cannon-agrees-hide-witness-names-trump-classified-documents-trial/
U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon ruled in favor of special counsel Jack Smith’s request to hide the names of witnesses involved in former President Donald Trump’s classified documents case.
The decision marks the end of a monthslong saga after Smith argued that the release of the names could expose them to danger. The identities of many witnesses would have been revealed if Trump was cleared to attach discovery evidence about the witnesses on the public court docket.
So they have been sniping at each other in legal briefs for a while.
A bunch more filings are going to hit the docket today
So here is the actual key parts of her ruling.
1st motion
The Court does not authorize Defendant Trump’s proposed redactions to witness statements in Exhibit 9 to the Motion.
ii. The Court authorizes the limited redactions to the portions of sentences set forth in the Special Counsel’s chart on the basis of the stated Rule 6(e) rationale
2nd motion
Motion Exhibit 2: The Court does not authorize Defendant Trump’sproposed redactions to witness statements in Paragraph 28
The Court accepts the remainder of the parties’ proposed redactions as to Exhibit 2.2 The parties are directed to redact the name of a potential government witness
ii. Motion Exhibit 18: The Court authorizes the redactions of sentences identified in the Special Counsel’s submission relating to grand jury testimony of “Person 12."
iii. Opposition Exhibit 1: The Court does not authorize Defendant Trump’s proposed redactions to witness statements in Paragraph 28
iv. Opposition Exhibit 5: On the basis of the Special Counsel’s stated Rule 6(e) rationale, the Court directs fullsealing of Opposition Exhibit 5
She then mentions two Special Counsel Motions which are granted in part and denied in part based on previous rulings.
So for the most part this is a very favorable ruling for Jack Smith.
This goes back months. At least as early as January. They have been fighting over redactions to motions. Not even the motions themselves which are still undecided.
And Jack Smith made Cannon reverse a ruling