Judge Cannon's 'stunning' ruling questioned by former U.S. attorney as 'very unusual'

A ruling by U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida Judge Aileen Canon to allow parties with no connection to the charges filed against Donald Trump for refusing to return stolen government documents was questioned by a former U.S. attorney on MSNBC Saturday afternoon.

Speaking with host Katie Phang, ex-prosecutor Joyce Vance said it was unfathomable why Cannon — a Trump appointee — would waste time hearing from outsiders in a way that even the Supreme Court likely would balk at.

"I have to start with Mar-a-Lago classified docs, the espionage case as it is known," host Phang prompted. "The idea that Judge Cannon is allowing lawyers and friends of the court to make oral arguments and a motion in open court is stunning to me. Do you share that same sentiment?"

"It is absolutely stunning," Vance replied before explaining, "We see amicus briefs used pretty heavily in front of the Supreme Court and in the courts of appeal — very rarely in the district courts. I think it is actually unprecedented to give them time to argue in the district court."

"Even in the Supreme Court that usually involves the government coming in in a case between private parties when they have a stake," she continued, This is like Judge Aileen Cannon, the judge on the case, going out on the streets and saying to just random people, 'Hey come on in, tell me what you think about this issue.'"

"These are non-parties, they do not have a stake in the outcome of this case, it is unusual," she added.

You can watch below or at the link.

MSNBC 06 08 2024 12 32 09youtu.be