Special counsel Jack Smith is asking Judge Aileen Cannon to reconsider a ruling that would allow former President Trump’s legal team to publicly disclose witness identities and their testimony to the court docket.
Trump’s team has sought to attach evidence given to them during the discovery process in other court filings set to be publicly posted in connection with the Mar-a-Lago documents case.
The Justice Department argued late Thursday that Cannon erred in her legal rationale for allowing them to do so, a move that risks exposing some two dozen witnesses to harassment as she requires no redactions.
“That discovery material, if publicly docketed in unredacted form as the Court has ordered, would disclose the identities of numerous potential witnesses, along with the substance of the statements they made to the FBI or the grand jury, exposing them to significant and immediate risks of threats, intimidation, and harassment,” prosecutors wrote in the 22-page filing.
It’s something they say “has already happened to witnesses, law enforcement agents, judicial officers, and Department of Justice employees whose identities have been disclosed in cases in which defendant Trump is involved.”
The filing came the day after another from the special counsel’s team noting that federal authorities are already investigating social media threats made against one of the witnesses in the case.
Though it is not common to ask a judge to reconsider one of their own orders, this would be the second time the Justice Department has done so in the case. The earlier request produced a decision from the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals that legal observers pegged as a “bench slap” for Cannon.
In the filing, prosecutors again point to the 11th Circuit, noting the court upheld a different standard for evaluating when documents relating to discovery must be sealed.
“Because the Court applied the wrong legal standard—which, as explained below, the Government did not discuss in its prior filing—reconsideration is warranted to ‘correct clear error,’” prosecutors wrote.
“Second, in addition to ensuring that the correct legal standard is applied, reconsideration is warranted to ‘prevent manifest injustice,’” they added.
If Cannon’s decision stands, Trump’s filing would also reveal the identities of witnesses not expected to testify at trial who “would otherwise be able to retain their anonymity and privacy absent the Court’s Orders.”
Cannon has given Trump’s team until Feb. 23 to respond.
Copyright 2024 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.best online jobs for teens 96033850 best online jobs with no experience 58337762 online remote jobs 42790064 home online jobs 55560439 high paying online jobs 89458591 online part time jobs work from home 41319252 data entry online jobs no experience 13224072 online jobs for college students 44629651 graphic design online jobs 3250378 digital marketing online jobs 654091 international online jobs work from home 5570942 amazon online jobs work from home no experience 46984341 side jobs from home 83528936 online jobs indiana 24988553 side jobs from home 55398228 online part time jobs work from home 26280111 online jobs indiana 35830713 adjunct professor online jobs 349291 chat online jobs from home 42797902 online jobs colorado no experience 25886252 are online jobs legit 36628792 it online jobs 88369454 online jobs for stay at home moms 69638359 online jobs duluth mn 22234626 transcription work from home 17278482 high paying online jobs 76949093 online jobs with no experience 77549432 online data entry jobs 17183852 daraz online jobs 33514333 online jobs colorado no experience 88319293