Late Thursday night, Special Counsel Jack Smith asked Judge Eileen Cannon to reconsider her order allowing some of the information to be released.
Jack Smith also warned of a “significant and immediate” threat to government witnesses if their names are not redacted.
Earlier this week, Judge Eileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, blocked special counsel Jack Smith's attempt to keep the names of government witnesses and other revelations under seal in the classified documents case against Trump.
Judge Eileen Cannon
Last June, Jack Smith indicted Trump on 37 federal charges in Miami.
Trump was charged with 31 counts of willful retention of national defense information and 6 other procedural offenses stemming from his conversations with his attorney.
Jack Smith was fighting to keep the names of the government's witnesses secret. He also opposed the release of discovery materials because one of the documents confirms the existence of another FBI investigation.
Last month, President Trump's lawyers filed a motion asking Judge Cannon to force Jack Smith to turn over the documents.
The documents provided by the special counsel's office were heavily redacted.
A journalist coalition that includes the Associated Press, The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN, Fox News, and other media outlets also requested disclosure of the discovered materials.
Last month, Jack Smith opposed Trump's proposal to release discovery materials in a 4-page filing reviewed by Critic portal.
The special counsel argued that the material discovered should remain confidential because one of the documents confirms the existence of another FBI investigation…presumably related to Trump.
It is not clear what FBI investigation Jack Smith was referring to, but it has been publicly reported that the FBI opened an investigation into “Trump's possible involvement on January 6” in April 2022.
Jack Smith requested that some documents remain completely sealed.
Judge Cannon on Tuesday denied Jack Smith's request to keep some of the findings under seal.
“Although asserted concerns about witness safety and intimidation could constitute a valid basis for overriding the strong presumption in favor of public access, the special counsel’s scattered and undifferentiated response failed to provide the court with the factual basis necessary to justify sealing,” Cannon wrote Tuesday. .
Jack Smith responded to Cannon late Thursday night and asked her to reconsider.
On Friday, Cannon temporarily suspended deadlines in her order pending a response from Trump's legal team. Trump's team has until February 23 to respond.
NEW: Late last night, Jack Smith asked Judge Cannon to reconsider her order allowing the release of some redacted information. She has just put her order on hold awaiting a response from Trump's team. pic.twitter.com/mxzNVeDLiT
– Julie Kelly (@julie_kelly2) February 9, 2024
But Judge Cannon denied Jack Smith's request to retain the names of the government's witnesses in the Mar-a-Lago case.
“Following in-camera review of the attached matter, and taking into account the unfavorable nature of ex parte action, the court reaffirms the Special Counsel's request to seal the attachment referenced in the Special Counsel's request for leave but finds an insufficient basis for deviating from the adversarial process in this case,” he wrote. Judge Cannon: “Special Counsel is directed to send the document to Defendants on or before February 10, 2024. The document will remain sealed pending further order from the court.”
In denying Smith's request to present an ex parte document (except for the defence), Cannon said:
“Following in-camera review of the attached matter, and taking into account the unfavorable nature of the ex parte proceedings, the Court reaffirms the Special Counsel's request to seal the attached…
– Julie Kelly (@julie_kelly2) February 9, 2024
NBC News reported:
In a 24-page filing in federal court in Florida, prosecutors in Smith's case said the court applied the wrong legal standard when it ordered U.S. District Judge Eileen Cannon, who is overseeing the case, to unseal the materials. Canon issued an order in response on Friday that delayed its initial decision.
The filing refers to a document that included “information about possible unindicted obstructive conduct by the defendant, and speculation about witness tampering by an unindicted individual.” According to prosecutors, this witness refused to record his interview.
The Secret Documents Trial is currently scheduled for May 20, 2024, however it may be postponed due to the postponement of Jack Smith's January 6 trial in D.C., which was scheduled for March 4, 2024.
